Re: SCSI vs SATA - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From david@lang.hm
Subject Re: SCSI vs SATA
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.64.0704051905520.28411@asgard.lang.hm
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SCSI vs SATA  (Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>)
Responses Re: SCSI vs SATA  (Ron <rjpeace@earthlink.net>)
List pgsql-performance
On Thu, 5 Apr 2007, Scott Marlowe wrote:

> On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 14:30, James Mansion wrote:
>>> Server drives are generally more tolerant of higher temperatures.  I.e.
>>> the failure rate for consumer and server class HDs may be about the same
>>> at 40 degrees C, but by the time the internal case temps get up to 60-70
>>> degrees C, the consumer grade drives will likely be failing at a much
>>> higher rate, whether they're working hard or not.
>>
>> Can you cite any statistical evidence for this?
>
> Logic?
>
> Mechanical devices have decreasing MTBF when run in hotter environments,
> often at non-linear rates.

this I will agree with.

> Server class drives are designed with a longer lifespan in mind.
>
> Server class hard drives are rated at higher temperatures than desktop
> drives.

these two I question.

David Lang

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: david@lang.hm
Date:
Subject: Re: a question about Direct I/O and double buffering
Next
From: Ron
Date:
Subject: Re: SCSI vs SATA