> So please provide an example of enterprise class hardware which can
> deal with unit number conflicts.

you introduced unit number conflicts -- they were not part of discussion
before. please provide an example of two master drives on one IDE
channel -- this is the same technology level, esp. considering it's age
(and that of SATA)! furthermore, where's the IDE/ATA/... bus with seven
or 14 devices?

when comparing SATA to any SCSI, then go SAS -- same topology.

otherwise this discussion is like (foo) 'hey, the french got ``accents''
in their language -- imagine what they can do, on a linguistic level,
with them!' and (bar) 'yo, but the cars they build are crap!'.

>>>Even enterprise class high end FCAL storage arrays get into big trouble
>>>if they have broken disk on a loop.
>>
>>FCAL also was not mentioned (except by yourself).
> 
> 
> So please provide an example of a SCSI technology (I considere FCAL as a
> SCSI technology, too) which doesn't suffer from problems with a broken
> device on the bus.
> 
> I guess the only one is Serial Attached SCSI which simply copied the P2P
> concept from SATA.

hm, where's written that SATA was defined before SAS was?

furthermore, one can attach SATA devices to a SAS environment, and not
vice versa. so you claim a guy only speaking english more
multilinguistic than a guy who speaks english, spanish and perhaps
another language -- and is a fabulous translator, btw. weird.