[mythtv-users] The Bigger... Disk contest, Fall 2007 edition
gull at gull.us
Thu Oct 18 17:38:29 UTC 2007
On Oct 18, 2007, at 10:00 AM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> And, FWIW, I now *have* read that Google paper, or at least the
> abstract and the lede, and it doesn't mention SCSI disks at *all*; I
> repeat: the Google White Paper *does not say* that ATA disks are
> just as
> reliable as equivalent SCSI disks.
That doesn't surprise me. From what I've heard, Google is heavily
focused on $ per unit of performance, and as a result they use mostly
commodity hardware. I would actually be surprised if they were
running a lot of SCSI disks.
BTW, I just looked at Seagate's site and there's NO difference in
MTBF between Barracuda serially-attached-SCSI and SATA disks. MTBF
for the Cheetah SAS drives is slightly higher. (They don't make a
Cheetah SATA drive.) They don't quote MTBF for their desktop-class
drives. But what's really interesting is that *all* of these drives
have the same 5-year warranty. Since they don't quote service life,
I'm guessing the warranty is probably the best indicator of how long
they really think these drives will last.
More information about the mythtv-users