Update: Xserve And RAID To Use S3200 FireWire

Comments

• Reply 1 of 8

  hmurchison Posts: 12,425member

  January 30, 2003 8:29AM

  <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002970"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002970</a>;
• Reply 2 of 8

  gizzmonic Posts: 511member

  January 30, 2003 12:30PM

  I hope that they don't use firewire. What company offers firewire-native drives? They are all ATA drives with firewire bridge.
  
  
  
  For a SAN, that might be okay, but for a one-computer RAID, Fibre Channel SCSI (or even Serial ATA) would be a much better choice than an yet-untested version of Firewire. I sure as hell wouldn't use that on a production machine.
• Reply 3 of 8

  jared Posts: 639member

  January 30, 2003 1:10PM

  [quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
  
  <strong><a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002970"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002970</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;
  
  
  
  The reason I did not post it there is because it is bogged down with non sense (very off topic). And this would just be ignored.
  
  
  
  I think the only thing this will be used for is to connect the Xserve to the Xserve RAID, not the internal drives to the mother board.
  
  
  
  When the Xserve first came out I was thinking "now why on earth would they put a single FireWire port in the front?" Well this explains why...
• Reply 4 of 8

  jll Posts: 2,713member

  January 30, 2003 1:13PM

  [quote]Originally posted by Jared:
  
  <strong>
  
  When the Xserve first came out I was thinking "now why on earth would they put a single FireWire port in the front?" Well this explains why...</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  So you're going to connect a RAID to a FireWire 400 port?
  
  
  
  The FW on the front is for booting the machine from an external harddisk if something goes wrong with the harddrive modules.
• Reply 5 of 8

  jll Posts: 2,713member

  January 30, 2003 1:14PM

  [quote]Originally posted by Gizzmonic:
  
  <strong>but for a one-computer RAID, Fibre Channel SCSI (or even Serial ATA) would be a much better choice than an yet-untested version of Firewire. I sure as hell wouldn't use that on a production machine.</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  The Xserve RAID will have 7 dual channel ATA controllers.
• Reply 6 of 8

  jared Posts: 639member

  January 30, 2003 2:23PM

  [quote]Originally posted by JLL:
  
  <strong>
  
  
  
  So you're going to connect a RAID to a FireWire 400 port?
  
  
  
  </strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  No, I was thinking more along the lines that this new Xserve rev will have a S3200 port on the front...but I guess not...
• Reply 7 of 8

  jll Posts: 2,713member

  January 30, 2003 2:31PM

  [quote]Originally posted by Jared:
  
  <strong>
  
  
  
  No, I was thinking more along the lines that this new Xserve rev will have a S3200 port on the front...but I guess not...</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  You don't connect the RAID on the front - what would be the purpose?
• Reply 8 of 8

  hmurchison Posts: 12,425member

  January 30, 2003 3:45PM

  I was under the impression that the FW link would simply link up multiple units. By replacing Fiber Channel with FW Apple is potentially limiting the Xraid's connectivity to non Apple systems but perhaps that's not such a big deal.