To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The funny thing is, none of our drives are capable of 300mbit/s, short of burst from cache. It's all moot.
I don't understand this demand for SATA2. Once we have media that can actually USE the additional bandwidth, I'll understand - but as SATA/SATA2 is per-drive, and not shared, the BW is far more than sufficient even for 15k drives.
Well, actually all my drives are capable of 300Mbit/sec, which is 37.5MB/sec. I guess we confused MB with Mbit; SATA 3Gb/sec can go up to 300MB/sec.
That said, cache burst speed is somewhat important for me as my drives can transfer over 200MB/s from cache. So why limit them to 150MB/sec? Of course this speed difference is barely noticeable except in certain occasions.
The real reason why I want SATA 3.0 Gb/sec is not because of the bandwidth, but because of the features it brings compared to SATA 1.5 Gb/sec, such as NCQ, HotPlug, Staggered Spinup, Port Multiplication, Port Selection, eSATA and xSATA. Plus, why choose a standard from 2002 when you can choose one from 2005, if it works?







Member since:
2005-08-08
Solaris 10 06/06 also has SATA framework support for Marvell 88SX60xx and Marvell 88SX50xx based HBAs using the marvell88sx driver.
I wanted a cheap SATA2 300Mbit/sec controller card supported at this speed in Solaris using the native SATA framework. After looking around, I chose the Supermicro AoC-SAT2-MV8 card, less than $100 for 8 ports.
I hope in the future we'll see more support for SATA2 controllers.