From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Scobie Subject: Re: SAS v SATA interface performance Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 13:04:51 +1300 Message-ID: <4750A523.7010501@clear.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp.sauce.co.nz ([210.48.49.72]:57184 "EHLO smtp.sauce.co.nz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759612AbXLAAGF (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:06:05 -0500 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Thanks for the comments. It was really protocol/bus behaviour differences (if any), between SATA drives in a SAS environment, vs SAS drives, that I am looking at. I do know that SATA drives only support a subset of the SCSI commands and wondered if the SAS drives were more "clever" in a multi drive scenario. The comment I saw, which I'm trying to verify, mentioned the SATA drives "held the bus" or similar longer than SAS ones. Regards, Richard