[2618] in linux-scsi channel archive
Re: Drives and cards
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leonard N. Zubkoff)
Sun Oct 12 23:26:23 1997
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 09:31:06 -0700
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.3.95q.971011154938.7006A-100000@nic.com> (message from
Dave Wreski on Sat, 11 Oct 1997 15:55:03 -0400 (EDT))
From: "Leonard N. Zubkoff" <lnz@dandelion.com>
To: dave@nic.com
CC: linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 15:55:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dave Wreski <dave@nic.com>
[snip]
I have a 2940UW for my server, and would like to get another drive for it.
I was looking at the Barracuda 2.1G, which is only like $450. Is the
Ultra standard what defines SCSI-3? I have always heard these are good
drives, but are there any caveats?
The Ultra (or Fast-20) specification is just one part of the draft SCSI-3
standard.
I am not aware of any problems with recent Barracuda models. I tested a
Barracuda 9 earlier in the summer and did not find any problems with it.
I found a Micropolis Tomahawk 4.1G for $647. Are there any known problems
with these drives?
I tested some borrowed Micropolis Tomahawk drives earlier in the summer. I was
unable to get them to complete even my basic drive torture test without hanging
to the point of requiring power cycling or locking up the bus. Firmware
problems, I'm quite sure. I personally avoid Micropolis as their drives have
been prone to such firmware problems.
My personal favorites for SCSI drives at the moment are the IBM Ultrastar 2XP
for 7200 rpm, and the IBM Ultrastar 2ES for 5400 rpm. I would prefer the Atlas
II over the Ultrastar 2XP because of the Atlas II's superior seek optimization
algorithm, but Quantum seems prone to releasing buggy drive firmware and has
not been very responsive in getting fixes to customers. I demonstrated a
firmware bug to them back in June, and a fix is still not available. I've not
had enough experience with Seagate's recent Barracuda and Cheetah models to
comment one way or the other about them.
Leonard
