The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    SATA interface in a server.

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Thaenatos, Jul 20, 2009.

  1. Thaenatos

    Thaenatos Zero Cool

    Reputations:
    1,581
    Messages:
    5,346
    Likes Received:
    126
    Trophy Points:
    231
    In the five years as a system admin I have used nothing but scsi for server HDD interfaces. My company is in need of a new server and since times are pretty tough now we are looking into a SATA HDD server. The HDD would be a 7.2k 1TB + setup and Im wondering if this interface can handle the load. We are an engineering firm that handles alot of large .dwg files with access for 15-25 people on a gigabit LAN. As of now we are using scsi 10k rpm drives from 2006, but we are reaching the storage and resource limit way to easy. So to all you sys admins will SATA be able to handle said file load plus office, email ect. Thanks.

    If this is in the wrong section please move it, I didnt know where to ask a server based HDD question.
     
    Thaenatos, Jul 20, 2009
    #1
  2. crazycanuk

    crazycanuk Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    1,354
    Messages:
    2,705
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    56
    SATA works very well in a server application, I installed a server in an engineering company which serves alot of DWG files as well and have it setup with 8 1T drives in a raid 1-0.

    What network OS are you using?
     
    crazycanuk, Jul 20, 2009
    #2
  3. Thaenatos

    Thaenatos Zero Cool

    Reputations:
    1,581
    Messages:
    5,346
    Likes Received:
    126
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Thanks for the response we are using 2003 and planning on continuing use of it.
     
    Thaenatos, Jul 20, 2009
    #3
  4. sgogeta4

    sgogeta4 Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,389
    Messages:
    10,552
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    456
    sgogeta4, Jul 20, 2009
    #4
  5. AuroraAlpha

    AuroraAlpha Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    106
    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    SCSI is being replaced by SAS (Serial attached SCSI) which is effectively a fancy version of SATA. The command system is a bit more advanced and has some added features, but if you don’t need those then they even use the same physical connectors to give you an idea of how similar they are. Also consider that SATA drives are very commonly used in datacenters, Google has been a strong supporter of this trend putting one or two drivers in each server.

    If you’re worried about performance just run a simple benchmark on your current system and then compare it to the SATA drive you’re looking at. Data density is so much improved that you may have the same/better speed from a modern drive.

    Do be aware that consumer SATA drives probably won’t have the same reliability as your enterprise drives in use, so if you’re running more than one drive having RAID5/RAID6 wouldn’t be a bad idea.
     
    AuroraAlpha, Jul 20, 2009
    #5