From owner-freebsd-current Tue Aug 26 18:59:18 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA25182 for current-outgoing; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 18:59:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sendero-ppp.i-connect.net (sendero-ppp.i-Connect.Net [206.190.143.100]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA25142 for ; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 18:59:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 7020 invoked by uid 1000); 27 Aug 1997 01:59:21 -0000 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.2-alpha [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 18:59:21 -0700 (PDT) Organization: Atlas Telecom From: Simon Shapiro To: Tom Subject: Re: IDE vs SCSI was: flags 80ff works (like anybody doubted it) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hi Tom; On 26-Aug-97 you wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com wrote: > > ... > > I would think the disk subsystem would be the primary limiting factor > > here. What mix of controllers and drives were these tests run on? > > > > It would also be interesting to run this simulation against a striped > > set of SCSI drives. It would also be enlightening if you ran the same > > test against your striped set of IDE drives. > > I'm sure this was done on a stripped drives, using the fastest known > SCSI controller, and hardware cache. See "freebsd-scsi" archives. I do not know about the ``fastest'' bit, but the DPT controllers are pretty good at certain things. he point was not ``my SCSI is better han your IDE'', but rather to illustrate some of the capab ilities in FreeBSD we tend to forget at times (it is an Excellent O/S), or what to look for, IMHO, when building a machine for a specific task. Simon