Anyone have any experience with these? It can hold 48 drives for about 500 bucks.
The DS series is popular with farmers. But this is Sata which is inferior.
What is the largest size hdd it can take?
1 Like
Inferior to what?
[20 characters]
Sata is inferior to SAS, you want to have SAS servers which can also use SATA drives (the reverse not being true)
For the purposes of Chia, how is SATA inferior to SAS? This JBOD is an excellent value.
As far as I’m concerned mostly because sas can also use sata drives.
maybe you get a nice deal at some point for sas drives…then you cant use them
Used SAS hard drive is cheap.
I use EMC STL3, that old array. It can take 12 TB SAS. Last time bought 12TB SAS at ebay for $75.
I wish to know what kind hard drive can this NetApp take. Maxium size I mean.
according to the listing, it can take any size sata drive
As other people and I have said, it’s just less good, but it doesn’t mean it’s not good value or won’t work. You’re simply going one level below what’s optimal, similar to how usb is less good than sata.
I’m still trying to understand. There is no way you can seriously be making the argument that SATA vs SAS = USB vs SATA. For the purposes of Chia, there is no real difference or benefit other than SAS drives can often be had for slightly cheaper prices. Might as well go one step further then and say Netapp SAS drives are better than standard SAS drives because you can get them for even less $$ per TB, you just have to format them to 512b sectors. The word you used was “inferior”.
Are you really surprised by the statements from shade tree techs.
1 Like
everything on serverpartdeals is always cheaper for sata in my experience.
2 Likes
Try having a farm full of sata drives on sata servers, then try having a farm full of sas drives on sas servers. The difference might be minimal for you, but people who’ve done it will tell you it’s a world of difference. There’s a reason why datacenters run on SAS and not Sata.
Feel free to attack me, I don’t care, I’m simply stating how things are done by professionnals and I’m pointing out one thing that’s wrong with this particular server that the OP is asking feedback about. If you feel that Sata is equal or superior, then go ahead and buy Sata, nobody cares.
Yes that’s logical since sata (drives and servers) have less performance and flexibility than sas. The only downside is that sas drives mostly can’t be resold to consumers (excluding homelab hobbyists).
From a Chia farming perspective there is one big downside of SAS and that is power consumption. For Chia farming no one needs the extra performance nor the redundancy features (eg dual port). Nowadays, Enterprise SATA drives have the same reliability as their SAS counter parts.
3 Likes
Yes that’s also true, but from my understanding the power difference per Tb is negligible (at same rpm). You can use Sata drives in SAS servers to bypass that problem.
That’s not what I am arguing, I’m saying for the purposes of Chia which is an insanely low workload on spinning disks. I’m not comparing the performance for data centers where the wear factor alone of SATA vs SAS is a no brainer. I’m not attacking you, I’m trying to understand as I have been Chia farming since day one and your “inferior” comment is the first I’ve heard.
Feel free to browse this forum, there are plenty of posts about SAS vs Sata.
I did and all I found was Voodoo saying SAS is superior in a few discussions. There is no real debate as to why SATA is inferior for the purposes of Chia farming.
Can anyone with actual knowledge and not just opinion tell me why SATA is “inferior” to SAS for Chia farming? I’d really like to know as it may inform my future farm expansion.