I'm going to buy a new disk array of some sort to plug into a computer
running Linux. In days past, I'd simply have used SCSI. I happen to
have a couple of arrays already that use SATA drives but which connect to
the host via SCSI.

But I also have a small array connected using eSATA, and it seems to work
well too. I'd not buy that unit again (it's small and it uses PATA
drives), but I've had no problems with it or with eSATA or the eSATA
board on CentOS4.

So are either equally good, or have people found one or the other the
better choice. I do like the ability to chain SCSI devices, although
honestly I don't exploit it much. But it seems like I get more
flexibility with SCSI in the sense that I can organize the drives in the
array into multiple raid-sets/LUNs should I so choose. I don't know that
I have that capability with eSATA.

So I'm obviously leaning towards SCSI. But I'm more familiar with it.
Is there good reason to use eSATA? Can eSATA support multiple LUNs,
perhaps, like SCSI?

Thanks...

Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:
> I'm going to buy a new disk array of some sort to plug into a computer
> running Linux. In days past, I'd simply have used SCSI. I happen to
> have a couple of arrays already that use SATA drives but which connect to
> the host via SCSI.
>
> But I also have a small array connected using eSATA, and it seems to work
> well too. I'd not buy that unit again (it's small and it uses PATA
> drives), but I've had no problems with it or with eSATA or the eSATA
> board on CentOS4.
>
> So are either equally good, or have people found one or the other the
> better choice. I do like the ability to chain SCSI devices, although
> honestly I don't exploit it much. But it seems like I get more
> flexibility with SCSI in the sense that I can organize the drives in the
> array into multiple raid-sets/LUNs should I so choose. I don't know that
> I have that capability with eSATA.
>
> So I'm obviously leaning towards SCSI. But I'm more familiar with it.
> Is there good reason to use eSATA? Can eSATA support multiple LUNs,
> perhaps, like SCSI?
>
> Thanks...
>
> Andrew

Hello Andrew:

Perhaps more information is needed. How many actual hard disk drives will
you purchase? How important is transfer rate versus other factors?
How large will these disk drives be? Where does cost per hard disk fit in?
Will your future array see use as a server or workstation? Are you running
out of room on your present array? How old is your present array?

Some folks may wish to know if you need to maintain or construct a RAID
array. Are you now, or will you be using, LVM2? Are you up-to-date at
CentOS 4.6 or lower? Would this be a good time to go to CentOS 5.2?

Regards.

--
1PW

@?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:33:16 +0000, Andrew Gideon wrote:

> So I'm obviously leaning towards SCSI. But I'm more familiar with it.
> Is there good reason to use eSATA? Can eSATA support multiple LUNs,
> perhaps, like SCSI?
>
> Thanks...
>
> Andrew

Today's analog to SCSI using a SATA-like serial interface is SAS. I
think this is what you are looking for.

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionar...-Attached+SCSI