SATA/SAS question/discussion starter.

[Jedi_king]

Hello LTT forum!

 

Over the last few months, I've been building out my homelab. Over the course of this journey, I've ended up working with SAS (serial attached SCSI) as well as SATA (Serial ATA). Through my research into HBAs, backplanes, etc.. As well as a poor investment decision with a used Backblaze storage pod 2.0, I've learned a few key things about multi-drive storage arrays:

 

1. SATA sucks. Like, severely. That Used Backblaze pod I mentioned? It's gathering dust right now because after I spent literally 2 weeks troubleshooting, I could not get those stupid SATA multiplier boards to work. Like, at all.

2. Regardless of my issues with Sata multiplier boards, SAS seems to be a more robust protocol, with several advantages over SATA. 

 

Here are just a few: (note that this is my interpretation of my research, so if I make any incorect statements/assumptions, please let me know and I will correct them)

 

    1. SATA is a point-point protocol (Drive-storage controller). SAS functions very differently. In fact, the way it functions is more reminiscient of PCIe. The ports on a SAS controller can support up to X amount of lanes, and these ports can then be connected to backplanes, expanders (SAS Splitters, basically) and even external drive enclosures (Dell MD1000, for instance)

 

    2. SAS is backwards compatible, meaning you can connect a SATA drive to a SAS controller, and it will function just fine.

 

With this in mind, I can't help but wonder: why the hell are consumer motherboards still using SATA? Is it just cheaper or easier? I think consumer motherboards should start using SAS controllers instead of SATA, and I'd love to hear other people's opinions on the matter.

[Electronics Wizardy]

1 minute ago, Jedi_king said:

With this in mind, I can't help but wonder: why the hell are consumer motherboards still using SATA? Is it just cheaper or easier? I think consumer motherboards should start using SAS controllers instead of SATA, and I'd love to hear other people's opinions on the matter.

Cheaper, and consumers don't need the extra sas features. Also im pretty sure sata is lower power, and that is important in laptops.

 

Basically all desktops have less than 6 drives, so multipler support isn't needed. Basically all desktops are small, so the longer cable support isn't needed. SATA never gets the super fast drives, so full duplex isn't needed.

 

My guess, sata will die, hdd will slowly fad away is consumer desktops, and ssd will go pcie. I wouldn't be suprised to see a intel/amd chipset with no sata onboard in 5-10 years.