[olug] SATA? Do I want this?

[Phil Brutsche]

Will Langford wrote:
> SATA versus ribbon cable ATA is a no brainer - SATA better.
> 
> SATA is also starting to get some 'NCQ' stuff, which is basically
> like SCSI command queue'ing.

It *is* SCSI command-queueing.  It's getting to the point where the only
real difference between U320 SCSI and SATA is the rotational speed of
the platters.

Of course, SCSI ain't standing still either; SAS (serial attached scsi)
supports nifty things like dual drive controllers (performance and/or
redunancy, depending on implementation), is backwards compatible with
SATA (you can mix SAS and SATA drives on the same backplane - use cheap
SATA for your OS/mass storage and SCSI for things like your mail spool
or mission-critical SQL database) and rumor has it that we'll see 22k
RPM SAS drives one of these days

-- 

Phil Brutsche
phil at brutsche.us