From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Sep  7 07:47:21 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA21037
          for current-outgoing; Sun, 7 Sep 1997 07:47:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usr09.primenet.com (tlambert@usr09.primenet.com [206.165.6.209])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21028
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sun, 7 Sep 1997 07:47:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from tlambert@localhost)
	by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA08816;
	Sun, 7 Sep 1997 07:44:06 -0700 (MST)
From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Message-Id: <199709071444.HAA08816@usr09.primenet.com>
Subject: Re: lousy disk perf. under cpu load (was IDE vs SCSI)
To: michaelv@MindBender.serv.net (Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 14:44:06 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: sos@sos.freebsd.dk, mal@algonet.se, current@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199709070407.VAA04801@MindBender.serv.net> from "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" at Sep 6, 97 09:07:02 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> >The only advantage with SCSI these days
> >seems to be the ability to add more than 4 devices easily, and
> >to add them externally of the machine. But then again you have to
> >pay solid bucks to get that :)
> 
> Why is it necessary to bring this up over and over again.

Because the EIDE folks are bound and determined to pound a stake
into the heart of the SCSI "vampire" evry time they see it, whether
it's spotted in a coffin somewhere, or sitting on the French Riveria
under a beach umbrella sipping Pina Colada's.

8-) 8-).

(For the logic-impaired, if it's on the beach in daylight, it's not
a vampire)


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.