"David Lesher" <wb8foz@panix.com> wrote in message news:fkju66$r1$1@reader1.panix.com...[vbc
ol=seagreen]
> I've just tumbled into a situation re: Subject:
>
> It turns out the server we were going to acquire has 2.5" SAS drives.
> I'd never heard of same and assumed the slots/sleds were the usual 3.5"
> size; the kind where you can use the {orders-of-magnitude..} cheaper 
and
> 4x larger SATA drives transparently.
>
> Looking around, it appears they are speciality drives, 10,000 or
> 15,000 RPM. I do not see any of them larger than 140 GB; most are
> smaller. Further, Hitachi stopped making them two years ago, and it's
> mostly a Seagate concept.
>
> Anyone know the history on them?
>[/vbcol]
This certainly is one of the industries stupidest ideas.

A 10K 3.5" drive has 3" platters, the 2.5" platters have half the capacity.
3.5" drives come with 1-5 platters, 2.5" only 1-2. So
total capacity is 1/4 of 10K or 1/2 of 15K 3.5" drives,
but cost for SCSI drives has alway been per platter (or head).
If lowest $/GB is your goal, 7200 SATA will be even cheaper and cooler.

You don't get higher density (GB per frontal area),
you don't get lower power over 4-5 platter 10K drives,
the only benefit is more IO/s because you have more actuators.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]