FC or ATA for LOG FILES?

I'm setting up a new DB and separating the log files to storage separate
from the data. The data will be on FC storage. Will the log files perform
optimally on FC or ATA?
Thanks in advance.
SBGFC as in FC-ATA where you're basically using cheap hardware?
I question your decision to put data and log files on such equipment in the
first place. However, as to the log files themselves, I suspect you could
put log files on an MFM drive, or an old 20MB removable platter and be fine
99.99% of the time. There just isn't that much I/O to the logs.
"SBG" <sbg@.thomasville.org> wrote in message
news:O1j$TY%23HIHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> I'm setting up a new DB and separating the log files to storage separate
> from the data. The data will be on FC storage. Will the log files
> perform
> optimally on FC or ATA?
> Thanks in advance.
> SBG
>|||Oh, and .01% of the time is about 1 hour a year.
"Jay" <nospan@.nospam.org> wrote in message
news:eA$a3i%23HIHA.5544@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> FC as in FC-ATA where you're basically using cheap hardware?
> I question your decision to put data and log files on such equipment in
> the first place. However, as to the log files themselves, I suspect you
> could put log files on an MFM drive, or an old 20MB removable platter and
> be fine 99.99% of the time. There just isn't that much I/O to the logs.
> "SBG" <sbg@.thomasville.org> wrote in message
> news:O1j$TY%23HIHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> I'm setting up a new DB and separating the log files to storage separate
>> from the data. The data will be on FC storage. Will the log files
>> perform
>> optimally on FC or ATA?
>> Thanks in advance.
>> SBG
>>
>