[TriLUG] SAS vs. SATA performance

[Robert Dale]

On 7/26/07, Kevin Flanagan <flanagannc at gmail.com> wrote:
> There's a lot more to the difference, the drives themselves may in that
> order, but consider the controllers, channels etc.  Seek times, buffers,
> rotational speed are surely considerations, but SATA disks are generally on
> a smaller number of channels and ports than SAS drives.
>
> Another consideration is the MTBF, HP advised me that the MTBF of a SAS disk
> is 3 times greater than that of a SATA disk.

I wonder if he gets paid 3 times for saying that...

SAS and SATA are just buses, not a materials requirement, not a
manufacturing process, and not a mechanical specification.  Google and
CMU, separately, have put out some statistics on drive failures which
show MTBF means absolutely nothing and drive longetivity is completely
unpredictable.  Of course, the latest news is that drive failure is
caused by 'magnetic wobbles'.  So unless these are non-magnetic SAS
drives, you can safely ignore any MTBF sales-speak.

HTH

-- 
Robert Dale