[Gllug] [Fwd: Server]

[Mike Brodbelt]

On Sun, 2003-11-23 at 13:21, Henrik Morsing wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Richard Jones wrote:
> 
> > If you really believe
> > that a SCSI and an IDE disk from the same manufacturer aren't just two
> > identical spindles with different electronics tacked on the back, I
> > have a bridge to sell you.
> 
> They _are_ identical. The differens is in the electronics.

I've heard very credible information that after manufacture, spindles
are subjected to quality tests. Top of the range spindles get a SCSI
logic board, and are sold only as OEM branded (Sun, HP, SGI, etc) SCSI
disks, next batch down get SCSI logic boards and are sold to places like
Dell, then come the SCSI disks on direct sale, then IDE to OEMs, then
IDE direct sale.

The warranty on SCSI disks compared to IDE could bear this out. Also,
the same platters get far higher data densities when used as IDE,
whereas SCSI, which is seen as a server technology is more conservative.

Also bear in mind that SCSI electronics are much better than IDE for
servers with lots of disks (no siginificant per disk CPU loading like
you get with IDE). I've always used SCSI disks in servers, and have
never regretted it. In terms of cost, if a business has 50 people
depending on a server, 1000ukp of downtime doesn't take long to
accumulate. As a home user, the economic argument for IDE makes a lot of
sense. As a business that *needs* a workgroup server, the additional
cost of SCSI should't be a significant factor in the decision. If it
*ever* saves you any downtime, then it'll pay for itself immediately.

Mike.


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug