With prices in SATA as low as $100-$200 for a 1 TB drive, how is it compared to SAS. I understand speed may not be as fast but comparing a 4U 8x174GB SAS to a 1U 2x1TB it seems not only a space savings but also power savings which will pay off in the long run. If I was to find a 2U server with 4x1TB in RAID 5 it would be the way to go. Are there any issues you have encountered or forsee with this?
I have a couple servers I am leasing that are running SATA that appear to be running brilliantly for our application. I believe they have come quite a ways and I will go that route.
As the link above states, it really is all about what you are going to be using your systems for. If it's solely for something like file backups where you will have a near continuous stream of write with the odd need to recover data at a lower speed, than obviously the large disk offerings provided by SATA are handy.
Alternatively, if you need high performance, low latency read/ write access with more advanced queuing and handling, SAS is really the choice.
True. It may really comes down to speed vs. capacity. On our servers, being web servers capacity is the key feature we need presently. As SATA drives become faster the difference is not much.
We just picked up some brand new 1TB Seagate SATA2 server drives with 5 year warranties. We are going to be running them on a PERC5/i RAID controllers in RAID 5 for the performance increase along with capacity with redundancy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by princee18
I have heard that SAS is faster as well as reliable as compared to SATA. Secondly SAS scales better than SATA.
SAS vs SATA
