Quoting Dr Adam J Trickett <adam.trickett@???>:
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 at 09:35:28PM +0000, Nick Chalk wrote:
> > john lewis <johnlewis@???> wrote:
> > > Nick Chalk <nick@???> wrote:
> > >> Of course, if you want something that's going
> > >> to be _really_ reliable, I'd recommend LSI
> > >> Logic SCSI controllers, with Fujitsu or Maxtor
> > >> (nee Quantum) SCSI drives. :-)
> > > costing lots of pennies I imagine :-(
> >
> > Up-front costs are higher than PATA or SATA, yes.
> >
> > However, consider the Adaptec controller and IBM
> > 10k RPM drive in one of my boxes, still running
> > after ten years' use. The per-annum cost is quite
> > reasonable. :-)
> >
>
> I thought the evidence now suggested that the actual failure rate
> of a disk is proportional to it's age with only a small bath-tub
> effect and there was no longevity difference between modern SCSI
> or PATA/SATA disks at all. In the early days SCSI disks were both
> more reliable and more flexible and potentially faster, now the
> only difference is that they cost a lot more per Mb.
>
> There was some paper publised recently that Google funded - they
> have a lot of disks and wanted to understand how they failed - or
> something...
I thought that paper dispelled the recieved knowledge that higher temperatures
resulted in hard drives life span being shortened?
Martin N
----------------------------------------------
This mail sent through
http://www.ukonline.net
