On Wed, 28 May 2008, Brandon High wrote: > CMU released a study comparing the MTBF enterprise class drive with > consumer drives, and found no real differences.
That should really not be a surprise. Chips are chips and in the economies of scale, as few chips will be be used as possible. The quality of manufacture could vary, but this is likely more dependent on the manufacturer than the product line. Manufacturers who produce crummy products don't last very long. True enterprise drives (SCSA, SAS, FC) have much lower media read error rates by an factor of 10 and more tolerance to vibration and temperature. They also have much lower storage capacity and much better seek and I/O performance. Failure to read a block is not a failure of the drive so this won't be considered by any study which only considers drive replacement. SATA "enterprise" drives seem more like a gimmick than anything else. Perhaps the warranty is longer and they include a tiny bit more smarts in the firmware. Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
