Hey folks. I''ve looked around quite a bit, and I can''t find something like this: I have a bunch of older systems which use Ultra320 SCA hot-swap connectors for their internal drives. (e.g. v20z and similar) I''d love to be able to use modern flash SSDs with these systems, but I have yet to find someone who makes anything that would fit the bill. I need either: (a) a SSD with an Ultra160/320 parallel interface (I can always find an interface adapter, so I''m not particular about whether it''s a 68-pin or SCA) (b) a SAS or SATA to UltraSCSI adapter (preferably with a SCA interface) -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800)
On 12/ 4/09 02:06 AM, Erik Trimble wrote:> Hey folks. > > I''ve looked around quite a bit, and I can''t find something like this: > > I have a bunch of older systems which use Ultra320 SCA hot-swap > connectors for their internal drives. (e.g. v20z and similar) > > I''d love to be able to use modern flash SSDs with these systems, but I > have yet to find someone who makes anything that would fit the bill. > > I need either: > > (a) a SSD with an Ultra160/320 parallel interface (I can always find an > interface adapter, so I''m not particular about whether it''s a 68-pin or > SCA)Bitmicro makes one: http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisk_altima_35_u320.php They also make a version with a 4Gb FC interface. Haven''t tried either one, but found Bitmicro when researching SSD options for a V890. Eric
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at sun.com> wrote:> Hey folks. > > I''ve looked around quite a bit, and I can''t find something like this: > > I have a bunch of older systems which use Ultra320 SCA hot-swap connectors > for their internal drives. (e.g. v20z and similar) > > I''d love to be able to use modern flash SSDs with these systems, but I have > yet to find someone who makes anything that would fit the bill. > > I need either: > > (a) a SSD with an Ultra160/320 parallel interface (I can always find an > interface adapter, so I''m not particular about whether it''s a 68-pin or SCA) > > (b) a SAS or SATA to UltraSCSI adapter (preferably with a SCA interface) > >Hi Erik, One of the less well known facts about SCSI is that all SCSI commands are sent in legacy 8-bit mode. And it takes multiple SCSI commands to make a SCSI drive do something useful! Translation - it''s s-l-o-w. Since one of the big upsides of an SSD is I/O Ops/Sec - get ready for a disappointment if you use SCSI based connection. Sure - after the drive has received the necessary commands it can move data blocks reasonably quickly - but the limit, in terms of an SSD will *definitely* be the rate at which commands can be received by the drive. This (8-bit command) design decision was responsible for SCSIs'' long lasting upward compatibility - but it also turned into its achilles heel; that ultimately doomed SCSI to extinction. I understand exactly the problem you''re solving - and you''re not alone (got 4 V20Zs in a CoLo in Menlo Park CA that I maintain for Genunix.Org and I visit them less than once a year at great expense - both in terms of time and dollars)! IMHO any kind of a hardware "hack job" and a couple of 1.8" or 2.5" SATA SSDs, combined with an OpenSolaris plugin SATA controller, would be a better solution. But I don''t like this solution any more than I''m sure you do! Please contact me offlist if you have any ideas and please let us know (on the list) how this works out for you. Regards, -- Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20100222/c790c715/attachment.html>
Al Hopper wrote:> > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at sun.com > <mailto:Erik.Trimble at sun.com>> wrote: > > Hey folks. > > I''ve looked around quite a bit, and I can''t find something like this: > > I have a bunch of older systems which use Ultra320 SCA hot-swap > connectors for their internal drives. (e.g. v20z and similar) > > I''d love to be able to use modern flash SSDs with these systems, > but I have yet to find someone who makes anything that would fit > the bill. > > I need either: > > (a) a SSD with an Ultra160/320 parallel interface (I can always > find an interface adapter, so I''m not particular about whether > it''s a 68-pin or SCA) > > (b) a SAS or SATA to UltraSCSI adapter (preferably with a SCA > interface) > > > Hi Erik, > > One of the less well known facts about SCSI is that all SCSI commands > are sent in legacy 8-bit mode. And it takes multiple SCSI commands to > make a SCSI drive do something useful! Translation - it''s s-l-o-w. > Since one of the big upsides of an SSD is I/O Ops/Sec - get ready for > a disappointment if you use SCSI based connection. Sure - after the > drive has received the necessary commands it can move data blocks > reasonably quickly - but the limit, in terms of an SSD will > *definitely* be the rate at which commands can be received by the > drive. This (8-bit command) design decision was responsible for > SCSIs'' long lasting upward compatibility - but it also turned into its > achilles heel; that ultimately doomed SCSI to extinction.Really? I hadn''t realized this was a problem with SSDs and SCSI. Exactly how does this impact SSDs with a SAS connection, since that''s still using the SCSI command set, just over a serial link rather than a parallel one. Or, am I missing something, and is SAS considerably different (protocol wise) from traditional parallel SCSI? Given the enormous amount of legacy hardware out there that has parallel SCSI drive bays (I mean, SAS is really only 2-3 years old in terms of server hardware adoption), I am just flabbergasted that there''s no parallel-SCSI SSD around.> I understand exactly the problem you''re solving - and you''re not alone > (got 4 V20Zs in a CoLo in Menlo Park CA that I maintain for > Genunix.Org and I visit them less than once a year at great expense - > both in terms of time and dollars)! IMHO any kind of a hardware > "hack job" and a couple of 1.8" or 2.5" SATA SSDs, combined with an > OpenSolaris plugin SATA controller, would be a better solution. But I > don''t like this solution any more than I''m sure you do! > > Please contact me offlist if you have any ideas and please let us know > (on the list) how this works out for you. > > Regards, > > -- > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX al at logical-approach.com > <mailto:al at logical-approach.com> > Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/I''ve got stacks of both v20z/v40z hardware, plus a whole raft of IBM xSeries (/not/ System X) machines which really, really, really need an SSD for improved I/O. At this point, I''d kill for a parallel SCSI -> SATA adapter thingy; something that would plug into a SCA connector on one side, and a SATA port on the other. I could at least hack together a mounting bracket for something like that... -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:09:20PM -0800, Erik Trimble wrote:> I''ve got stacks of both v20z/v40z hardware, plus a whole raft of IBM > xSeries (/not/ System X) machines which really, really, really need an > SSD for improved I/O. At this point, I''d kill for a parallel SCSI -> > SATA adapter thingy; something that would plug into a SCA connector on > one side, and a SATA port on the other. I could at least hack together a > mounting bracket for something like that...I''ve hoped for target-mode drivers for some of the older parallel-scsi hba''s. With those, and comstar, one could connect such boxes to a complete zfs storage system, booting and all. In my case, the idea is to get rid of the older, noisy powerhungry disks entirely - but it''s just an idle hope. -- Dan. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 194 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20100224/2ea0d12e/attachment.bin>
>>>>> "et" == Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at Sun.COM> writes:et> I''d kill for a parallel SCSI -> SATA adapter thingy http://www.google.com/products?q=scsi+to+sata+converter -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 304 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20100223/80000005/attachment.bin>
Miles Nordin wrote:>>>>>> "et" == Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at Sun.COM> writes: >>>>>> > > et> I''d kill for a parallel SCSI -> SATA adapter thingy > > http://www.google.com/products?q=scsi+to+sata+converter >Not quite. All of those convert from SATA-150 to 68-pin LVD Ultra160 (at best, some do just Ultra2). I need something that will fit in a hot-swap bay, so it has to have the SCA connector at the standard location. What I''m really gonna need is a 2.5" SATA drive -> SCA Ultra320 adapter. Not quite around yet, I see. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA
Erik Trimble
2010-Feb-24 01:36 UTC
[zfs-discuss] SSDs with a SCSI SCA interface? (WHEE! MAYBE!)
Miles Nordin wrote:>>>>>> "et" == Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at Sun.COM> writes: >>>>>> > > et> I''d kill for a parallel SCSI -> SATA adapter thingy > > http://www.google.com/products?q=scsi+to+sata+converter > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >OK, I think I might have found what I''m looking for: Acard *ARS-2320H* http://www.acard.com/english/fb01-product.jsp?idno_no=239&prod_no=ARS-2320&type1_title=SCSIDE%20II%20Bridge&type1_idno=11 Best price I can find is $125 or so, which, while not cheap, is OK. I might have to get one and try it. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA
Erik Trimble
2010-Feb-24 01:41 UTC
[zfs-discuss] SSDs with a SCSI SCA interface? (WHEE! MAYBE!)
Erik Trimble wrote:> Miles Nordin wrote: >>>>>>> "et" == Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at Sun.COM> writes: >>>>>>> >> >> et> I''d kill for a parallel SCSI -> SATA adapter thingy >> >> http://www.google.com/products?q=scsi+to+sata+converter >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zfs-discuss mailing list >> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >> > > > OK, I think I might have found what I''m looking for: > > Acard *ARS-2320H* > > http://www.acard.com/english/fb01-product.jsp?idno_no=239&prod_no=ARS-2320&type1_title=SCSIDE%20II%20Bridge&type1_idno=11 > > > > Best price I can find is $125 or so, which, while not cheap, is OK. I > might have to get one and try it. >OK, wrong link. That one is for the 68-pin version. Here''s the SCA hot-swap box: http://www.acard.com/english/fb01-product.jsp?idno_no=241&prod_no=ARS-2320H&type1_title=SCSIDE%20II%20Bridge&type1_idno=11 -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at sun.com> wrote:> I need either: > > (a) a SSD with an Ultra160/320 parallel interface (I can always find an > interface adapter, so I''m not particular about whether it''s a 68-pin or SCA) > > (b) ?a ?SAS or SATA to UltraSCSI adapter (preferably with a SCA interface)Check http://lmgtfy.com/?q=scsi+ssd 3 of the top 5 results might work for you. -B -- Brandon High : bhigh at freaks.com For sale: One moral compass, never used.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at sun.com> wrote:> Al Hopper wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at sun.com >> <mailto:Erik.Trimble at sun.com>> wrote: >> >> ? ?Hey folks. >> >> ? ?I''ve looked around quite a bit, and I can''t find something like this: >> >> ? ?I have a bunch of older systems which use Ultra320 SCA hot-swap >> ? ?connectors for their internal drives. (e.g. v20z and similar) >> >> ? ?I''d love to be able to use modern flash SSDs with these systems, >> ? ?but I have yet to find someone who makes anything that would fit >> ? ?the bill. >> >> ? ?I need either: >> >> ? ?(a) a SSD with an Ultra160/320 parallel interface (I can always >> ? ?find an interface adapter, so I''m not particular about whether >> ? ?it''s a 68-pin or SCA) >> >> ? ?(b) ?a ?SAS or SATA to UltraSCSI adapter (preferably with a SCA >> ? ?interface) >> >> >> Hi Erik, >> >> One of the less well known facts about SCSI is that all SCSI commands are >> sent in legacy 8-bit mode. ?And it takes multiple SCSI commands to make a >> SCSI drive do something useful! ? Translation - ?it''s s-l-o-w. ?Since one of >> the big upsides of an SSD is I/O Ops/Sec - get ready for a disappointment if >> you use SCSI based connection. ? Sure - after the drive has received the >> necessary commands it can move data blocks reasonably quickly - but the >> limit, in terms of an SSD will *definitely* be the rate at which commands >> can be received by the drive. ?This (8-bit command) design decision was >> responsible for SCSIs'' long lasting upward compatibility - but it also >> turned into its achilles heel; that ultimately doomed SCSI to extinction. > > Really? ?I hadn''t realized this was a problem with SSDs and SCSI. ? Exactly > how does this impact SSDs with a SAS connection, since that''s still using > the SCSI command set, just over a serial link rather than a parallel one. > ?Or, am I missing something, and is SAS ?considerably different (protocol > wise) from traditional parallel SCSI?The key difference here is that the SCSI protocol commands and other data are sent to/from the SAS drive at the same (high) speed over the serial link. And another point - SAS and SATA are full duplex. This is why parallel SCSI had to die - you simply can''t send enough SCSI commands over a SCSI parallel link to keep a modern, mechanical, 7,200RPM drive busy - let alone an SSD. Think about that for a Second - the mechanical drive is probably going to max out at 400 to 500 I/O Ops/Sec. By way of contrast, todays SSDs will do 33,000+ I/O Ops/Sec (for a workload that is I/O Op/Sec intensive). And tomorrows SSDs are going to be much faster.> Given the enormous amount of legacy hardware out there that has parallel > SCSI drive bays (I mean, SAS is really only 2-3 years old in terms of server > hardware adoption), I am just flabbergasted that there''s no parallel-SCSI > SSD around.Now you know why. There is simply no way to get around the parallel SCSI standard spec and the fact that *all* SCSI commands are sent 8-bits wide at the very slow (original) 8-bit rate. And if you do find a converter, you''re going to be bitterly disappointed with the results - even with a low-end SSD. PS: I think if someone does build/sell a parallel SCSI -> SATA SSD converter board, they are going to get a very high percentage of them returned from angry customers telling them they get better performance from a USB key that they do with this piece of *!@$!$# converter. And it''s going to be very difficult to explain to the customer why the convert board is so slow - and working perfectly.>> I understand exactly the problem you''re solving - and you''re not alone >> (got 4 V20Zs in a CoLo in Menlo Park CA that I maintain for Genunix.Org and >> I visit them less than once a year at great expense - both in terms of time >> and dollars)! ? IMHO any kind of a hardware "hack job" and a couple of 1.8" >> or 2.5" SATA SSDs, combined with an OpenSolaris plugin SATA controller, >> would be a better solution. But I don''t like this solution any more than I''m >> sure you do! >> >> Please contact me offlist if you have any ideas and please let us know (on >> the list) how this works out for you. >> >> Regards, >> >> -- >> Al Hopper ?Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX al at logical-approach.com >> <mailto:al at logical-approach.com> >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT >> OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 >> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ > > I''ve got stacks of both v20z/v40z hardware, plus a whole raft of IBM xSeries > (/not/ System X) machines which really, really, really need an SSD for > improved I/O. ? At this point, I''d kill for a parallel SCSI -> SATA adapter > thingy; something that would plug into a SCA connector on one side, and a > SATA port on the other. I could at least hack together a mounting bracket > for something like that... > > > > > > -- > Erik Trimble > Java System Support > Mailstop: ?usca22-123 > Phone: ?x17195 > Santa Clara, CA > >-- Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/