• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

T or F: SCSI sucks at the small files

why is it bad that SCSI is good at small files? interesting...
SCSI is made for a multi user environment it excels at it actually and is pretty good at single user. Raptors are really good at single user and not so good at multi user.
 
I use SCSI to create Office2000Pro Administrative Installation Points, which comprise about 20000 files, lots of them being little clipart ones. I would tend to say F, although I haven't worked with a Raptor yet. SCSI certainly lays waste to IDE, judging by the one time I tried doing the same task on my home PC. SCSI devastates IDE on this task.
 
This is one of the many reasons no serious servers I have ever seen run anything but SCSI. Generally servers have a ton of smaller files. Of course SCSI is faster on the big files too.
 
You mean like this problem?

Also, what drives are you comparing? I have a SCSI hd in my backup server that's over 8 years old. :Q My 60GB 5400 rpm 2MB cache IDE drive blows it out of the water in anything you throw at them. Even if you're comparing a relatively recent scsi drive, the Raptor may still win in common single-user scenarios. SCSI really stretches its legs in multi-user (server) and doing more than one disk-intensive task at once. It also has a proven track record of high reliability, though the Raptor also comes with a 5 year warranty.
 
SCSI owns if you do a lot of BitTorrent.

My Torrent drive is like 99% fragmented, and it still runs darn fast.
 
raptors are worthless...transfer rates are not that great. Sure the latency is better than 7200rpm drives, but i'd still rather have most other top of the line SATA drives....and ANY modern scsi drive
 
Originally posted by: xenos500
raptors are worthless...transfer rates are not that great. Sure the latency is better than 7200rpm drives, but i'd still rather have most other top of the line SATA drives....and ANY modern scsi drive
Click to expand...

Even if you can justify the cost difference of the SCSI controller and more expensive SCSI drive (I can't, personally), why would you want a 7200 rpm SATA drive that's slower than the Raptor in every respect? Unless you're looking for raw storage, in which case speed hardly matters anyway...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top