[1736] in linux-scsi channel archive
Re: enabling error recovery
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Van Zandt)
Mon Apr 21 21:41:06 1997
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 21:35:07 -0400
From: Jim Van Zandt <jrv@vanzandt.mv.com>
To: eowmob@exp-math.uni-essen.de
CC: linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu
Cc: jrv@vanzandt.mv.com
In-reply-to:
<Pine.A32.3.95.970421113435.102408E-100000@werner.exp-math.uni-essen.de>
(message from Michael Weller on Mon, 21 Apr 1997 11:47:12 +0200
(MESZ))
Michael Weller <eowmob@exp-math.uni-essen.de> writes:
>On Sun, 20 Apr 1997, Jim Van Zandt wrote:
>> Should I set "alternate tracks per zone", or "alternate sectors per
>> zone", or both? What are the advantages and limitations of alternate
>> tracks vs. alternate sectors?
>
>I won't be surprised if this question is only theoretical. Probably the
>disk will either only support alternate sectors or tracks. Try which
>setting it accepts and use that.
Actually, scsi-config shows both "alternate tracks per zone" and
"alternate sectors per zone" in gray boxes, and I cannot change either
one. Does this mean that the entire reassignment mechanism is not
implemented for this drive? I expected better from IBM.
- Jim Van Zandt
