![]() ![]() Also, with larger RAID groups, the dual porting can be quite advantageous as it's completely possible to saturate a single SATA channel during sequential operations when there are lots of disks in a single channel/port. When using one single SAS hard disk drive, random I/O performance is up to four times higher than when using a SATA drive (access time) Moreover, a SAS hard. Doesn't sound like much but, since NL-SAS is generally only a very small premium vs enterprise grade SATA disks, it's almost certainly worth it. The combination of the dual ported interface and the more advanced queuing with SAS will generally squeeze about 15-20% more real-world performance from those spinning platters, and perhaps up to 30% in some workloads. NL-SAS and enterprise SATA disks are basically the same hardware/7.2K RPM spinning platters with nothing more than a different controller/interface on them, however, that SAS interface still provides some measurable benefits. Now, if you are comparing SATA disks to 10/15K SAS drive indeed those are a LOT more expensive. They are available in higher capacities than enterprise. Nearline or Midline SAS are usually mechanically-equivalent to 7,200 RPM SATA disks, but feature a SAS interface and offer the benefits of the SAS protocol. I would have to have different arrays for each (which I also assume means different parity drives for each array).įrom what I can tell, these are some pros and cons, and I'm positive this list is not all-inclusive.I can only re-enforce what was said above, NL-SAS is the best option and should be only marginally more than SATA for the overall solution, if you're seeing some major price difference between NL-SAS and enterprise grade SATA drives, I would suggest investigating further as I'd be concerned that they might not be enterprise grade SATA disks. Enterprise SAS disks are your fastest and most resilient rotating media available at 10,000 and 15,000 RPM. Also my understanding: I cannot mix SAS and SATA in the same array. Does one have benefits over the other? The primary purpose is going to be a storage array for Jellyfin, but will also likely house some central storage for other VM's (yet t be implemented). Larger drives tend to have larger caches, and full duplex scales much better. The interface spec (iirc) for SAS is full duplex, while SATA is half duplex. I know that SATA speeds are probably more than enough, but I can get SAS for the same price. If possible, find a solution that supports SSD caching and a system that can handle raid 10. That said, the sweet spot seems to be about 12TB for me right now, and I have two options: SAS 12Gb/s and SATA. I have a plethora of 2TB drives (almost enough to fill this case), but that's a lot of electricity for relatively little storage space, considering I can get all of those down into as little as a single drive (should I spend the money). In this video we will be taking a look at three storage connectors that are currently in the market We break down all three to help you understand what they. Para esta comparativa vamos a utilizar uno de los SSD SATA 3 de mejor rendimiento del mercado: un Corsair Neutron XTi de 480 GB cuyas velocidades teóricas son de 560 MB/s de lectura y 540 MB/s de escritura. ![]() In an effort to start populating this beast of a case, I plan on buying some newer, larger hard drives (8TB & up). I also took advantage of (but have not yet implemented) the Black Friday sale for the Lifetime Pro License of Unraid. I plan on swapping out the motherboard to something slightly newer (but not a ton), some socket 2011 v2's. I was gifted an old SuperMicro 846 24-bay server with a TQ backplane and some old Opterons. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |