On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:15 PM, David Magda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 30, 2008, at 19:09, Tim wrote: > > SAS has far greater performance, and if your workload is extremely random, >> will have a longer MTBF. SATA drives suffer badly on random workloads. >> > > Well, if you can probably afford more SATA drives for the purchase price, > you can put them in a striped-mirror set up, and that may help things. If > your disks are cheap you can afford to buy more of them (space, heat, and > power not withstanding). > > More disks will not solve SATA's problem. I run into this on a daily basis working on enterprise storage. If it's for just archive/storage, or even sequential streaming, it shouldn't be a big deal. If it's random workload, there's pretty much nothing you can do to get around it short of more front-end cache and intelligence which is simply a band-aid, not a fix. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
