Message-ID: <46164113.9060305@3times25.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 08:46:11 -0400
From: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061025)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SCSI vs SATA
References: <HCEPKPMCAJLDGJIBCLGHMEMGHGAA.james@mansionfamily.plus.com>
	<19221.1175751146@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1175786370.9839.31.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
	<E1HZUmO-0007bS-62@elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0704051312410.26199@asgard.lang.hm>
	<28551.1175839215@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20070406114336.GD4374@mathom.us>
In-Reply-To: <20070406114336.GD4374@mathom.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Michael Stone wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 02:00:15AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It seems hard to believe that the vendors themselves wouldn't burn in
>> the drives for half a day, if that's all it takes to eliminate a large
>> fraction of infant mortality.  The savings in return processing and
>> customer goodwill would surely justify the electricity they'd use.
> 
> Wouldn't help if the reason for the infant mortality is bad handling 
> between the factory and the rack. One thing that I did question in the 
> CMU study was the lack of infant mortality--I've definately observed it, 
> but it might just be that my UPS guy is clumsier than theirs.

Good point.  Folks must realize that carriers handle computer hardware 
the same way they handle a box of marshmallows or ball bearings..  A box 
is a box is a box.

-- 
Until later, Geoffrey

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
  - Benjamin Franklin