Feizhou wrote:
Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
Hey look at me! I'm top-posting!!! Nanny-nanny-poo-poo
Come get me Trolls!
Please do not top post. :)
He was probably hinting at me for top posting. Unfortunately, sometimes
I write from the blackberry, which only allows top posting. Take it up
with RIM.
SATA drives typically do 60-70MBs, interleaved you
should see 120-140MB/s on sequential. Random IO on SATA
usually sucks too badly to even talk about...
Eh? It cannot be worse than PATA drives now can it?
_______________________________________________
Probably not, but is SATA really much worse then SCSI or SAS? I did
some testing on a dell PE 2950 of 750GB SATA's vs SAS and SCSI drives,
and the SATA drives seem to be faster at least at first glance. I don't
have good numbers from the SCSI tests, but at least for sequantial, I'm
getting a better speed off the SATAs.
Russ
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
