Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
Start here ...
The Storage Forum FAQ: Discussion Thread.
- Thread starter Tannin
- Start date
Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
I dislike sticky threads Doug (be they announcements or any other kind) and I cringe to think what P5 will do to me after I jumped all over him for making one of his threads sticky the other day but ... yup ... I think this one ought to be an announcement. Thanks.
Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
Want to add a "Where is TSF hosted?" answer Doug?
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
How about a FAQ question regarding what new users can do to help? My only idea was that new users help by contibuting to the regular forums. I've been asked this a couple times and that's the best I can come up with.
James
Storage is cool
Good idea. Also it might be worth clarifying what the original core group of users are going to do now that the forums are up and running...
Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
Why, sit back and watch Doug do all the work, of course!
But seriously now, Mercutio asks a good question, and supplies the correct answer to it (at least in my view, anyway). It ought to be answered in more detail though, and I'll get on to it.
As to your question James, there remains a good deal of work to do. Number one priority right now seems to be to work out a fair and open set of working rules to ensure gentlemanly discussion (i.e., defend against the Vambats of this world), and appropriate proceedures to implement them. Far better to pre-plan this now, rather than wait till there is a crisis of some sort and decide things in the heat of the moment.
(I think we all welcome public discussion of this matter, by the way. If you, or any other reader, has thoughts on this, go right ahead and post them.)
But seriously now, Mercutio asks a good question, and supplies the correct answer to it (at least in my view, anyway). It ought to be answered in more detail though, and I'll get on to it.
As to your question James, there remains a good deal of work to do. Number one priority right now seems to be to work out a fair and open set of working rules to ensure gentlemanly discussion (i.e., defend against the Vambats of this world), and appropriate proceedures to implement them. Far better to pre-plan this now, rather than wait till there is a crisis of some sort and decide things in the heat of the moment.
(I think we all welcome public discussion of this matter, by the way. If you, or any other reader, has thoughts on this, go right ahead and post them.)
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
Here is my long winded reply, please feel free to criticize:
2.3.2 Are SCSI drives made to higher standards than IDE drives?
What do "higher standards" imply? Simply put: Are SCSI drives made with superior or more advanced components then ATA drives? The answer is: "Not Really", but the foundation of SCSI reliability, stability, and solidity, require that our discussion does not end with an ambiguous answer. Thus, our brief discussion will move through simple prerequisites for ATA and SCSI drives which will in turn, lead us to an eligible answer.
Drive manufacturers design products for varying markets. ATA drives have traditionally been designed to meet the needs of average users, and SCSI drives have been designed to qualify in the advanced region of hosting mass amounts of data through complex server environments or isolated workstation users with high demands on data manipulation. Nevertheless, through innovation and market requirements, these two areas no longer hold clear boundaries to just one type of hard disk drive technology. The ATA drive has advanced in technology to the point that it is able to compete in a limited, but successful, extent within the once dominant SCSI arena. To this end, we will see how the component standards between ATA and SCSI drives vary.
So, what makes one hard disk physically superior to another? The market it is designed for. Let us start off with a simple comparison between two ATA hard disks, they're both made by the same manufacturer, in the same plant, but are slated for two different markets. We have the WD400BB and the WD400EB. Both are built with the same areal densities and both of them use Giant Magneto Resistive heads, but then the similarities end. At first glance, the chassis design is completely different. The WD400BB uses a robust tub design that brings its weight up to roughly 1.5 pounds. A more robust Head Stack Assembly and spindle motor contribute to this extra bulk. Down the scale we go to the WD400EB drive, weighing in at roughly .75 pounds. It's lighter weight Head Stack Assembly (resulting in a lower seek time), carefully manicured chassis to reduce weight & material cost, and a lighter weight spindle motor, which is only required to support speeds between 4,500 and 5,400 rpm, contributes to this anemic weight. Do these differences demonstrate that one product is superior to the other? For some individuals it does, but when it comes to manufacturing and assembly tolerances, they both must meet certain goals of quality. Both of these products meet the needs of market - the WD400EB will work fantastically as it loads a XBOX profile to memory, whilst being crammed into a cigar box sized computer. Identically, the WD400BB meets the needs of a businessperson as it loads spreadsheets and documents to memory, whilst writing to a swap file.
Now, however, we move into an arena that requires a great deal of disk activity - large files being written in a sequential or random manner to a disk. For example, a graphic artist might be manipulating a 200 MB tif image, or simply wants to save a 4 GB qxd file. Perhaps a programmer is compiling a file that is 300 MB in size, or an exchange email server containing 80 GB of remote mail needs to be defragmented. Once we come into this arena of hard disk activity, the performance of high-end ATA hard disks, and especially, the well-designed performance of a SCSI hard disk come into action.
At this stage, we begin to see the ATA drive get abused, simply because it has not been designed for this activity. However, the SCSI drive comes into it's own, as it's hearty spindle motor whirs at 10,000 rpm, the robust Head Gimbal Assembly smoothly flies in the face of wind that none of us will ever experience, or the tough pivot and flex assembly that help the Head Stack achieve seek times almost twice as fast as an ATA hard disk. Do these special features make a SCSI component superior in build quality? No, it simply emphasizes the design requirements for the product.
Thus, hard disk manufacturers have recently changed the design requirements for their products, and are now entering the so-called SCSI market. Did these manufacturers begin using components that are less likely to fail? No, they began implementing design changes to meet new tasks. So, are SCSI hard disks made to higher standards then ATA drives? Generally, no - they are made to meet different requirements. Does this mean that all component and build quality requirements are the same for all manufacturers? No, like all manufactured products, being more profitable requires that some quality tolerances be lowered. But that is an economics discussion designed for a different forum.
2.3.2 Are SCSI drives made to higher standards than IDE drives?
What do "higher standards" imply? Simply put: Are SCSI drives made with superior or more advanced components then ATA drives? The answer is: "Not Really", but the foundation of SCSI reliability, stability, and solidity, require that our discussion does not end with an ambiguous answer. Thus, our brief discussion will move through simple prerequisites for ATA and SCSI drives which will in turn, lead us to an eligible answer.
Drive manufacturers design products for varying markets. ATA drives have traditionally been designed to meet the needs of average users, and SCSI drives have been designed to qualify in the advanced region of hosting mass amounts of data through complex server environments or isolated workstation users with high demands on data manipulation. Nevertheless, through innovation and market requirements, these two areas no longer hold clear boundaries to just one type of hard disk drive technology. The ATA drive has advanced in technology to the point that it is able to compete in a limited, but successful, extent within the once dominant SCSI arena. To this end, we will see how the component standards between ATA and SCSI drives vary.
So, what makes one hard disk physically superior to another? The market it is designed for. Let us start off with a simple comparison between two ATA hard disks, they're both made by the same manufacturer, in the same plant, but are slated for two different markets. We have the WD400BB and the WD400EB. Both are built with the same areal densities and both of them use Giant Magneto Resistive heads, but then the similarities end. At first glance, the chassis design is completely different. The WD400BB uses a robust tub design that brings its weight up to roughly 1.5 pounds. A more robust Head Stack Assembly and spindle motor contribute to this extra bulk. Down the scale we go to the WD400EB drive, weighing in at roughly .75 pounds. It's lighter weight Head Stack Assembly (resulting in a lower seek time), carefully manicured chassis to reduce weight & material cost, and a lighter weight spindle motor, which is only required to support speeds between 4,500 and 5,400 rpm, contributes to this anemic weight. Do these differences demonstrate that one product is superior to the other? For some individuals it does, but when it comes to manufacturing and assembly tolerances, they both must meet certain goals of quality. Both of these products meet the needs of market - the WD400EB will work fantastically as it loads a XBOX profile to memory, whilst being crammed into a cigar box sized computer. Identically, the WD400BB meets the needs of a businessperson as it loads spreadsheets and documents to memory, whilst writing to a swap file.
Now, however, we move into an arena that requires a great deal of disk activity - large files being written in a sequential or random manner to a disk. For example, a graphic artist might be manipulating a 200 MB tif image, or simply wants to save a 4 GB qxd file. Perhaps a programmer is compiling a file that is 300 MB in size, or an exchange email server containing 80 GB of remote mail needs to be defragmented. Once we come into this arena of hard disk activity, the performance of high-end ATA hard disks, and especially, the well-designed performance of a SCSI hard disk come into action.
At this stage, we begin to see the ATA drive get abused, simply because it has not been designed for this activity. However, the SCSI drive comes into it's own, as it's hearty spindle motor whirs at 10,000 rpm, the robust Head Gimbal Assembly smoothly flies in the face of wind that none of us will ever experience, or the tough pivot and flex assembly that help the Head Stack achieve seek times almost twice as fast as an ATA hard disk. Do these special features make a SCSI component superior in build quality? No, it simply emphasizes the design requirements for the product.
Thus, hard disk manufacturers have recently changed the design requirements for their products, and are now entering the so-called SCSI market. Did these manufacturers begin using components that are less likely to fail? No, they began implementing design changes to meet new tasks. So, are SCSI hard disks made to higher standards then ATA drives? Generally, no - they are made to meet different requirements. Does this mean that all component and build quality requirements are the same for all manufacturers? No, like all manufactured products, being more profitable requires that some quality tolerances be lowered. But that is an economics discussion designed for a different forum.
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
I'm sure James will like your response....but I still want to argue about is some more. Not now though, maybe tomorrow.
James
Storage is cool
I think it's a mighty fine piece of writing. The only thing I really have against it is its length!
Tim, I'm not really decided on one side or the other of the "argument" - all I can do is rely on the experts.
More thinking required, methinks.
Tim, I'm not really decided on one side or the other of the "argument" - all I can do is rely on the experts.
More thinking required, methinks.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
How is this and other parts of the FAQ coming along?
James
Storage is cool
Slowly. Once I'm on top of my new duties at SR, I'll revisit this. That'll be a couple of weeks I'd say.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
James is responsible for reviews of optical drives.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
James said:
I was under the impression that Tony was assisting with the FAQ section.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Ah yes, but it is James who is in charge of that now, since his assumption of the mighty sceptre of Storageforum Chairmanship.
Thinking back, I think Tannin's project was actually just the FAQ about the forum itself. Maybe he'll pop in and clarify that sometime soon.
Thinking back, I think Tannin's project was actually just the FAQ about the forum itself. Maybe he'll pop in and clarify that sometime soon.