ATA 100 on a proliant server?

[Orc General]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20050524/bs_nf/32310

Was reading the article about the proliant server. I was shock that they
offer ATA100 on the drive system. I know Ok so its raid ATA but my
impression has always been that IDE should be no where near server
platforms. Anyone have more experience with this? Do these server machines
running ATA stand up well in the real world.

 

[Keith Williams]

In article <IXJke.7092$Ot6.696995@news20.bellglobal.com>,
orc_general@hotmailNOSPEM.com says...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20050524/bs_nf/32310

Was reading the article about the proliant server. I was shock that they
offer ATA100 on the drive system. I know Ok so its raid ATA but my
impression has always been that IDE should be no where near server
platforms. Anyone have more experience with this? Do these server machines
running ATA stand up well in the real world.

ATA-100? Are you sure? ATA-100 is a little long in the tooth.

IDE has grown up. The only real difference between SCSI and IDE drives
is the electronics board. The drives are often identical (it's been
that way for quite some time). IDE is now faster and cheaper than
SCSI, so there is no reason for the expense of SCSI on a small system.
My Tyan 2875S (single-processor version of a dual Opteron server board)
has IDE (2) and SATA (4) channels.

--
Keith

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Tue, 24 May 2005 15:00:49 -0400, the renowned Keith Williams
<krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

In article <IXJke.7092$Ot6.696995@news20.bellglobal.com>,
orc_general@hotmailNOSPEM.com says...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20050524/bs_nf/32310

Was reading the article about the proliant server. I was shock that they
offer ATA100 on the drive system. I know Ok so its raid ATA but my
impression has always been that IDE should be no where near server
platforms. Anyone have more experience with this? Do these server machines
running ATA stand up well in the real world.


ATA-100? Are you sure? ATA-100 is a little long in the tooth.

IDE has grown up. The only real difference between SCSI and IDE drives
is the electronics board. The drives are often identical (it's been
that way for quite some time).

Really?
http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ds_cheetah15k.4.pdf

The above one is about twice the performance (half the access time,
half the latency, twice the spindle RPM, half the seek time, twice the
sustained transfer rate) of the closest Ultra ATA/100 or SATA/150
drive from the same manufacturer. Only capacity tends to be lower than
for the cheap "pack rat" consumer drives. Some of them are still being
made in 5400 RPM.

IDE is now faster and cheaper than
SCSI, so there is no reason for the expense of SCSI on a small system.

Just as most people would be perfectly fine with 1GHz rather than 3.
Or a Chevy rather than a Z-4.

My Tyan 2875S (single-processor version of a dual Opteron server board)
has IDE (2) and SATA (4) channels.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Pooh Bear]

Orc General wrote:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20050524/bs_nf/32310

Was reading the article about the proliant server. I was shock that they
offer ATA100 on the drive system. I know Ok so its raid ATA but my
impression has always been that IDE should be no where near server
platforms. Anyone have more experience with this? Do these server machines
running ATA stand up well in the real world.

There's very little difference in IDE and SCSI drive reliability these days.
Indeed I had 2 consecutive brand new Seagate Barracuda IVs ( SCSI ) fail in just
a few months some years back.

The speed of IDE is also way ahead of early implementations of SCSI anyway
although high end SCSI still has the edge on data transfer rates.

Graham