From: Richard Scobie <r.scobie@clear.net.nz>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: Mark Lord <liml@rtr.ca>, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SAS v SATA interface performance
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:55:46 +1300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4751F482.60204@clear.net.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4751C6DA.3080409@garzik.org>
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Mark Lord wrote:
>> SATA port multipliers (think, "hub") permit multiple drives
>> to be active simultaneously.
>
> Quite true, although the host controller could artificially limit this,
> giving the user a mistaken impression of their port multiplier being
> limited to one-command-per-N-drives.
Interesting. I was basing my comments on what may well be a vested
interest slanted paper - see the sidebar on page 2.
http://www.xtore.com/Downloads/WhitePapers/SAS_SATAValue%20Whitepaper_final.pdf
For the modest extra cost of a non-RAID SAS HBA and JBOD enclosure with
SATA drives, over a port multiplied setup, there would seem to be some
advantages.
Or have I been taken in by the hype... :)
Regards,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-01 23:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-30 19:19 SAS v SATA interface performance Richard Scobie
2007-11-30 21:24 ` Michael Tokarev
2007-11-30 23:17 ` Alan Cox
2007-12-01 7:43 ` Richard Scobie
2007-12-01 14:37 ` Greg Freemyer
2007-12-01 19:19 ` Richard Scobie
2007-12-01 20:01 ` Mark Lord
2007-12-01 20:40 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-12-01 23:55 ` Richard Scobie [this message]
2007-12-02 3:45 ` Mark Lord
2007-12-02 3:49 ` Mark Lord
2007-12-10 7:33 ` Tejun Heo
2007-12-10 14:36 ` Jens Axboe
2007-12-10 16:28 ` Mark Lord
2007-12-10 14:50 ` James Bottomley
2007-12-10 16:32 ` Mark Lord
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-12-01 0:04 Richard Scobie
2007-12-01 0:17 ` Alan Cox
2007-12-01 3:06 ` Mark Lord
2007-12-10 7:15 ` Tejun Heo
2007-12-10 16:23 ` Mark Lord
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4751F482.60204@clear.net.nz \
--to=r.scobie@clear.net.nz \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=liml@rtr.ca \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).