I was wondering why do servers still come with SAS disks instead of SSD disks? I know that SAS are faster than normal hard drives but they are still much slower than SSDs. I think they are more expensive too :s
so what's the deal here?
Answer
Cost, capacity and reliability are factors for why SSD adoption hasn't occurred at all levels. SSDs cost more than SAS disks for a given capacity.
But in general, servers don't actually come with a particular type of disk. Storage is something that is configured afterwards.
Some background information: Are SSD drives as reliable as mechanical drives (2013)?
Edit:
Also note that not every workload benefits from SSD. Provisioning 20TB of bulk storage where only a small subset needs to be active at a given time is best for standard disks (plus tiering/caching). Purely sequential workloads are better served by spinning disks. And more than that, SSDs tend to do best outside of the disk form-factor. For the past year, I've been using PCIe-based SSDs to get around cost, performance and compatibility issues with traditional disk-based SSDs.
Comments
Post a Comment