Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Zeev's Turnips - No Politics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuck Williams who wrote (976)	10/24/2001 7:33:22 PM
From: Steve Lee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99280

Hi Chuck, The need for storage will not go away - quite the reverse. There is some value add, but the add is minimal. There are many disadvantages compared to SCSI. Major disadvantage is performance when you have praps 2Gb of bandwidth going to 100+ disks shared between multiple servers. This is nowhere near the performance of decent SCSI disk subsystems. Not to mention a HELL OF A LOT more expensive - this is where my problem with value add lies. The second major point is the resilience of having the disks in a separate cabinet. Physical failure of disks is normally a non issue due to RAID. Physical failure of electronic components is aso a rarity once the system has proved itself for a few hours. The real problems come with cabling and the accidental disconnection/damagin thereof. A separate cabinet and delicate fibre cabling is the main cause of downtime in datacentres in my experience.