SAS Vs Ultra SCSI
Author
Discussion

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,863 posts

269 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
Looking at the new HP G5 servers and they all seem to be migrating towards SAS.

Simple question, features/benefits of going Serial Attached SCSI? I've got to spec some servers for the US and I'm always nervous of speccing something new when I can't physically touch it first.

As it's going to be a few thousand miles away it's got to be as reliable as the standard RAID5 I'm used to (despite the relatively high number of HP disk failures I've witnessed over the years, it just keeps running.)

I'm inclined to spec some DL360's if I can just get over my fear of change

JamieBeeston

9,294 posts

295 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
using SAS here.

benefits are 'upto 3Gbit/sec bandwidth' more devices per chain, smaller physical interface size (so they can now offer 2.5" drives alongside 3.5" drives) uniform standardisation (SATA drives alongside SCSI Drives)

it's the way of the future maaaaan

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,863 posts

269 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
Must. Learn. To. Embrace. Change

Cheers Jamie, bullet about to be bitten then

JamieBeeston

9,294 posts

295 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,863 posts

269 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
Nice link Jamie, so a SAS controller can also support SATA drives?

JamieBeeston

9,294 posts

295 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
BliarOut said:
Nice link Jamie, so a SAS controller can also support SATA drives?


Yup

SAS is Serial Attached SCSI

SATA is Serial Attached ATA

roadsweeper

3,789 posts

304 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
We're recommended SAS for all our new customers' servers. Jamie has already hte major benefits - I like being able to get more drives into 1U chassis with the 2.5" form factor and of course the higher bandwidth achievable.

agent006

12,058 posts

294 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
JamieBeeston said:
smaller physical interface size (so they can now offer 2.5" drives alongside 3.5" drives)


Ahhh, so THAT's how they can fit 4 drives in a 360.

JamieBeeston

9,294 posts

295 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
agent006 said:
JamieBeeston said:
smaller physical interface size (so they can now offer 2.5" drives alongside 3.5" drives)


Ahhh, so THAT's how they can fit 4 drives in a 360.


Dell are offering 8 drives in a 2u 2950 now (4 in a 1u 1950)

Both Dual Dual Core Machines.

iirc the 2.5" drives are limited to 73gb tho (dont think anyone MAKES any larger 2.5" drives in the mainstream yet!)

Edited by JamieBeeston on Thursday 3rd August 20:22

roadsweeper

3,789 posts

304 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
JamieBeeston said:
Dell are offering 8 drives in a 2u 2850 now (4 in a 1u 1950)
Do you mean the new 2950 in the latter case Jamie?

roadsweeper

3,789 posts

304 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
Incidentally, assuming there us a 6950 to replace the 6850 I can't wait to see how many drives it can take!

JamieBeeston

9,294 posts

295 months

Thursday 3rd August 2006
quotequote all
roadsweeper said:
JamieBeeston said:
Dell are offering 8 drives in a 2u 2850 now (4 in a 1u 1950)
Do you mean the new 2950 in the latter case Jamie?


damn it, I even checked to make sure i'd not done that

roadsweeper

3,789 posts

304 months

Friday 4th August 2006
quotequote all
JamieBeeston said:
roadsweeper said:
JamieBeeston said:
Dell are offering 8 drives in a 2u 2850 now (4 in a 1u 1950)
Do you mean the new 2950 in the latter case Jamie?


damn it, I even checked to make sure i'd not done that
Don't worry, I invoiced a client yesterday for a 1950 instead of the 2950 they (and I) had actually ordered!

maddog-uk

2,392 posts

276 months

Saturday 5th August 2006
quotequote all
They are lovely! Go for it...