[8531] in linux-scsi channel archive
Re: Fast Wide vs Ultra Wide
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ricky Beam)
Tue Apr 4 01:44:11 2000
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 01:40:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ricky Beam <jfbeam@bluetopia.net>
To: Matthew Dharm <mdharm-scsi@one-eyed-alien.net>
Cc: The Linux SCSI list <linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10004032229270.32219-100000@ziggy.one-eyed-alien.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10004040134300.23096-100000@beaker>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Mon, 3 Apr 2000, Matthew Dharm wrote:
>> Are the drives jumpered for parity? If they aren't jumpered, they may not
>> even calculate parity.
>
>No parity jumpers.
Holy shit! A drive that doesn't "do" parity? Can you tell the 960 to ignore
parity? (dangerous as hell, but better than nothing, right?)
>Good. This means that I'm not crazy.
I'm not qualified to make that call :-)
>The thing that got me is thi: the test that the controller performs is
>independent of devices. In fact, it's under a heading marked "cable
>tests", and there is a separate section for "device tests". I didn't
>think parity was in-band data...
Who knows what those nuts at Mylex are checking. I have an AccelRaid 150
that likes to lock up _alot_ -- it ain't the drives, the cable, the
termination, or the OS... there's a problem with the controller and they
have yet to even say "ok, it's a problem." (I sent it to them for repair.
They sent it back to be with a new RTC battery. Yeah, that fixed it.)
--Ricky
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
