[5426] in linux-scsi channel archive
Re: Dumb question: Which is "better" SCSI or IDE disks?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (C S Hendrix)
Tue Dec 15 12:45:55 1998
To: linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu
Reply-To: shendrix@escape.widomaker.com
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 15 Dec 1998 13:10:15 GMT."
<Pine.LNX.3.91.981215130551.20745D-100000@toaster.roan.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:42:07 -0500
From: C S Hendrix <shendrix@escape.widomaker.com>
In message <Pine.LNX.3.91.981215130551.20745D-100000@toaster.roan.co.uk>, Mike
Jagdis writes:
> The DPT is not the problem (I use them myself). See my other
> messages on linux-kernel regarding RAID, Seagates and chunk
> sizes. The caching strategy used by Seagate drives appears to
> go to pieces when you read, skip, read, skip in anything other
> than 32k chunks. The default RAID chunk size used by md is
> not 32k...
I'll try that.
But I was saying that the performance for even a single drive seems
low to me. My fast/narrow drive is as fast as the wide Hawks. I
thought going with wide drives would be a bit better than that.
--
Shannon - shendrix@widomaker.com - www.widomaker.com/~shendrix/myresume.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"When you say 'I wrote a program that crashed Windows', people just
stare at you blankly and say 'Hey, I got those with the system,
*for free*'." -- Linus Torvalds
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
