Niva writes:
> Ideal user would run massive databases that need tons of accesses all the time. ...
To me that's an Enterprise-style environment, ie. not a suitable customer at all.
Can you imagine the mayhem if a card fails? There are better solutions for this
which do have redundancy.
> Small business server with the right usage will make this worth it.
A small business server is more likely to be bottlenecked by its network connection.
You'd be amazed how many SMEs still use 100Mbit, or even 10BaseT.
sceen311 writes:
> I don't like that you skew your charts by including a 5400 rpm drive. Why not use
> a 7200 rpm drive, which is plenty common among the enthusiast crowd, or even a
> raid 0 setup of hard disks?
I don't know whether a 7200rpm or even a WD VR 10K SATA would give numbers that much
better than a 5400. However, point taken, so...
Andrew, how about replacing the 5400rpm comparison with a decent mechanical SAS?
That would be more akin to the kind of traditional drive that a 'power' user would
employ, eg. Seagate 600GB ST3600057SS 6Gbit/sec (this is what I use; does over
over 200MB/sec max), and should convey the high water mark for mechanical drives.
My Dell T7500 has two of these, while my video conversion PC has four. My site
has HDTach test results for the 450GB version (not had a chance to test the 600GB
unit yet):
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/diskdata.html
I did a simple test using a P55 platform with an LSI SAS3041E-R (3Gbit ports), using
4 x 450GB 15K SAS, which gave more than 700MB/sec (I don't have a 6Gbit SAS card yet).
Ian.