Dubious advantages of DRBD vs shared storage

I don't know how to rewrite properly these 2 points but there are some dubious contents:

Shared storage typically DO NOT have a single point of failure

Shared storage sold for cluster(HA) typically are fully redundant with 2 controllers, and each host is connected to both controllers. I have also seen 2 boxes JBOD used with software mirroring. I have never seen any HA setup with a SPOF, this argument is dubious IMHO Pweltz (talk) 18:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overhead also dubious

Shared storage can also use SCSI/SAS direct-attached in a 2 nodes cluster. In this case it is as fast as it can get. I also doubt shared storage over FC would be slower. To be fair it should be mentioned DRBD would be sloer on write because of TCP overhead (except vs iSCSI perhaps) Pweltz (talk) 18:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Price, space and power

IMO the real advantage of DRBD is that you can do small HA setups, less expensive and more efficient in term of power. (Added a few words on that) Pweltz (talk) 18:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]