| Main > Everything Else |
| When did RAID 5 debut? |
| << < (3/3) |
| AlanS17:
--- Quote from: NightGod on November 10, 2006, 02:43:32 am ---In 1988, RAID levels 1 through 5 were formally defined by David A. Patterson, Garth A. Gibson and Randy H. Katz in the paper, "A Case for Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks (RAID)". This was published in the SIGMOD Conference 1988: pp 109–116. The term "RAID" was first introduced in this paper; it spawned the entire disk array industry. --- End quote --- There's nothing "inexpensive" about a SCSI hard drive. :-\ |
| boykster:
--- Quote from: AlanS17 on November 11, 2006, 01:19:53 am ---There's nothing "inexpensive" about a SCSI hard drive. :-\ --- End quote --- My point exactly from my first post. On a cost / GB basis, IDE -> PATA or SATA will cream SCSI any day. Then toss in that compaq's use a proprietary caddy you might as well just go to the bank, get a couple of stacks of $20's or $100's and have a campfire and roast marshmallows. Don't get me wrong, Compaq servers have served me VERY WELL over the years, but for home use, I prefer generic hardware running 3ware (or other) IDE raid arrays. I also prefer linux for these systems, but win2k / 2k3 server would probably be ok to. |
| Random24:
Something else to think about with an old server is power consumption. I was running an old HP server for about a year. I then went on an electrical efficiency kick and replaced all my incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent. It seemed like our electric bill was still large after all that so I looked around for what else might be using a lot of power and found the old server. I scrounged up some other parts and bought a new power supply that was rated very good on power consumption and built myself a PC that I would use as my server. Even with 6 IDE drives running 24/7 I have saved almost $40 a month on electricity compared to the old HP server with 6 SCSI drives and 4 IDE drives. I also went from a dual Pentium Pro 200 with 512MB of ram to an Duron 1600 with 1.5GB. Had I not run the old server for the year I could have probably bought better hardware with the almost $500 I would have saved. |
| NightGod:
--- Quote from: AlanS17 on November 11, 2006, 01:19:53 am ---There's nothing "inexpensive" about a SCSI hard drive. :-\ --- End quote --- No, but at that time, four 10 MB SCSI hard drives were alot cheaper combined than one 40 MB hard drive, which what they actually mean by it. Just like today you could get three 250GB SATA drives for $200 but one 750GB SATA would cost you $375. THAT'S where the "inexpensive" part comes in. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Previous page |