Re: [exim] RAID level for mailstore

Graeme Fowler wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 12:11 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
>> I'd agree, but for those who write the checks the cheapness of (s)ata is
>> hard to resist. It's very unlikely the savings weigh up against the
>> increased reliability of scsi, but as with many things, money talks.
>
> In this and my previous $dayjob I've had some degree of responsibility
> for a range of NetApp filers or similar devices from other vendors with
> fiber channel, SCSI and SATA disks in various configurations. The
> failure rate of the SATA disks far outweighs the rates of the others.
>
> That said, the way the arrays are put together in many cases the first
> evidence of a drive failure is a box arriving from the vendor with a
> replacement, or a phone call from their tech support to tell us. Ah, the
> joys of enterprise support contracts :)
>
> Graeme
>
>

Nowadays, we pull the typical PATA/SATA within 2 years, so still have
near-zero failures in use, and can no longer justify the SCSI premium.

Bill