![]() ![]() |
Aug 26 2008, 05:56 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Junior ![]() Group: Members Posts: 90 Joined: 4-August 05 Member No.: 67473
|
I have a DELL Poweredge 700 and its been running perfectly for 4 years. Earlier this month a drive died. I ended up moving all the data to another server and took this one out of production.
I figured since i am rebuilding the RAID anyways, and since the drives have been ON/RUNNING/IN USE for 4 years i should probbaly change the other drives in there as well. So i am replacing all 3 MAXTOR drives in the server. What kind of drives are good and "rated" for a server or RAID ? The server has a Raid controler (CERC 6ch) and this will run Windows 2003 SBS I am looking for something reasonably priced that i can also depend on. |
|
|
|
Aug 26 2008, 09:06 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
MSFN Master Group: Software Developers Posts: 2379 Joined: 14-August 04 From: Joliette, QC Member No.: 27580 OS: XP Pro x86
|
If personally find Western Digital RE2 / RE3 drives to be of high quality and are built with RAID in mind.
|
|
|
|
Aug 27 2008, 02:12 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Scroll up - see the Google bar? Group: Super Moderator Posts: 5250 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Vancouver, Canada Member No.: 32464 OS: Vista Ultimate x64
|
Bear in mind - the CERC 6ch controller has the infamous "2TB limit" found on some older hardware. You'll have to keep your individual arrays below this size.
Otherwise, I'll second jcarle's suggestion. |
|
|
|
Aug 27 2008, 02:47 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 28-May 06 Member No.: 97470
|
Get some seagate raptors, or cheetahs, upgrade it to SAS.
|
|
|
|
Aug 27 2008, 03:34 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Scroll up - see the Google bar? Group: Super Moderator Posts: 5250 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Vancouver, Canada Member No.: 32464 OS: Vista Ultimate x64
|
That's assuming that he can get a SAS controller that's compatible with his system. If the disk load isn't too great, then there's no real reason for him to completely change the hard drive subsystem.
Also, SAS controllers and drives are typically more expensive than their SATA counterparts. |
|
|
|
Aug 27 2008, 09:02 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
MSFN Master Group: Software Developers Posts: 2379 Joined: 14-August 04 From: Joliette, QC Member No.: 27580 OS: XP Pro x86
|
Also, SAS controllers and drives are typically more expensive than their SATA counterparts. Not to mention that if data safeguarding is more important for the OP then speed is, the RE drives will easily reliability that matches or exceeds SAS (due to their lower revolutions) and costs a fair amount less. |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th November 2008 - 04:38 AM |