On fredag 28 oktober 2005, 11:10, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote: > If I've learned one thing about disks in the last few years, it's > that you should never ever buy the largest disks available.
Right. I do the same thing, but for a different reason: Usually, the GB/price-ratio has a max, not for the latest and biggest, but for the somewhat smaller. I have a 250 GB drive waiting for me at the post office now, that has the best ratio now, a month ago, it was a 200 GB drive. As for the SATA vs. SCSI, I guess there is a reason why SCSI disks usually has a 5 year warranty, whereas *ATA just one. But they are also 5 times as expensive per GB as SATA. I have personally no experience with SCSI, but at my old institute, they were used exclusively, and we had 3 TB of SCSI disks when I finished my studies. Since I knew sysadmin well, SCSI disks blow up too, so, what I would do in this situation is to go for 3ware RAID controllers and SATA with lots of redundancy. You could have 4 redundant disks and still be within the cost of SCSI, unless, of course, the disks live up to their one-year warranty period, which hasn't happened to me yet... :-) Cheers, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Programmer / Astrophysicist / Ski-orienteer / Orienteer / Mountaineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/ OpenPGP KeyID: 6A6A0BBC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
