I understand from NEC's white paper, Silent data corruption in disk arrays, that:
- some SAS drives should have a "T10-DIF" feature to detect silent data corruption; whereas
- "There is no standard for ATA-based drives (including SATA) that protects against silent data corruption at the SCSI level in the storage technology stack."
The point of that white paper is to inform people of NEC's proprietary technology for protecting against silent data corruption in SATA drives. However, ZFS seems to provide at least equivalent protection, and is preferable to me as it is not proprietary (except for Oracle's most recent ZFS revisions).
I have two questions:
Am I right in thinking that using ZFS with T10-DIF SAS drives would give an additional layer of protection against silent data corruption as compared to using just one of those two technologies alone?
Given that T10-DIF SAS drives do not seem to be readily available, what reasons are there - if any - to prefer non-T10-DIF SAS drives over equivalent* SATA drives, or vice versa?
* By this, I mean comparing like with like: e.g. enterprise class SAS drives from a given manufacturer vs enterprise class SATA drives from the same manufacturer.