<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Exchange 2010 and SATA disk drives: DS14 vs DS4243 in Data Protection</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37754#M9192</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The DS4243 uses 3Gb SAS connection, but has 4 channels, summarizing up to 12Gbps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The whole architecture is different: SAS uses kind of star-architecture, providing a dedicated path to each disk, while DS14 still is serial.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As additional benefits it has a better ratio of disks/rackunit and more efficient powersupplies (at least compared to older DS14).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Mark&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:55:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mheimberg</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2010-11-01T09:55:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Exchange 2010 and SATA disk drives: DS14 vs DS4243</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37740#M9190</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I found that TR-3824 states this:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Although the SATA disks might be a good fit for performance and capacity, NetApp recommends that when using SATA disks for Exchange deployments, they be used in a DS4243 disk shelf.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've not been able to find out why DS4243 is preferred to DS14, and did not find a thread about this.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What is the real reason for this and is there a kb or doc explaining it ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regis&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 07:06:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37740#M9190</guid>
      <dc:creator>garruche</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T07:06:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Exchange 2010 and SATA disk drives: DS14 vs DS4243</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37746#M9191</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;From what I have been told, DS4243 with SATA is preferred over DS14 because the DS14 with SATA has only one I/O channel and SATA cannot overlap I/O. DS4243 shelves have multiple I/O channels. (The actual number escapes me at the moment.)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So, what this means is that SATA disk on DS4232 should be able to support more IOPS per disk than on DS14.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;Mark&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:45:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37746#M9191</guid>
      <dc:creator>beaupre</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-10-29T17:45:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Exchange 2010 and SATA disk drives: DS14 vs DS4243</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37754#M9192</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The DS4243 uses 3Gb SAS connection, but has 4 channels, summarizing up to 12Gbps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The whole architecture is different: SAS uses kind of star-architecture, providing a dedicated path to each disk, while DS14 still is serial.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As additional benefits it has a better ratio of disks/rackunit and more efficient powersupplies (at least compared to older DS14).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Mark&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:55:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37754#M9192</guid>
      <dc:creator>mheimberg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-11-01T09:55:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Exchange 2010 and SATA disk drives: DS14 vs DS4243</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37759#M9193</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you Mar and Markus for your answers.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regis&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 17:07:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Data-Protection/Exchange-2010-and-SATA-disk-drives-DS14-vs-DS4243/m-p/37759#M9193</guid>
      <dc:creator>garruche</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-11-01T17:07:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

