Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:20:35 -0800 From: Kent Stewart <kstewart@owt.com> To: Steve Wingate <s.wingate@cox.net> Cc: Steve Warwick <ukla@attbi.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 2 drives + 2 IDE channels = better? Message-ID: <3DBF17C3.2000901@owt.com> References: <20021029231124.MOQD14888.fed1mtao01.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Wingate wrote: >> Is is better to run a 2nd drive on another IDE channel or on the >> same bus? Eg. IDE channel 1 = ad0 (main OS), IDE channel 2 = ad1 >> (other data - maybe MySQL and websites?) >> > > For performance reasons a seperate channel is better. If you're > anal about cable neatness, air flow and all that weird stuff a > single cable does have some benefit for some people. I prefer the > two channel method whether it's two hard drives or a disk and > cd-rom, since an IDE disk can only do one thing at a time. > I also try to follow the 1 controller - 1 device rule. The motherboards with onboard raid are even better. You can have 4 HDs on individual controllers. All of my systems have /, /usr/src, and /usr/obj on different HDs for performance. The new round ATA-133 cables even get rid of the air flow problem. They are typically 24 inches long instead of the 18 inches max on the ribbon cable. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3DBF17C3.2000901>