From owner-freebsd-hardware  Mon Apr 15 14:02:48 1996
Return-Path: owner-hardware
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA06289
          for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lserver.infoworld.com (lserver.infoworld.com [192.216.48.4])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA06274
          for <hardware@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ccgate.infoworld.com by lserver.infoworld.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.29.1 #12) id m0u8vbz-000wtgC; Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:15 PDT
Received: from cc:Mail by ccgate.infoworld.com
	id AA829602096; Mon, 15 Apr 96 15:36:11 PST
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 15:36:11 PST
From: "Brett Glass" <Brett_Glass@ccgate.infoworld.com>
Message-Id: <9603158296.AA829602096@ccgate.infoworld.com>
To: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, jacs@gnome.co.uk, hardware@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Micropolis  1991 AV 9GB Drive
Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Just because you're traversing "more data" doesn't make said traversal
> any _faster_.

>From a throughput standpoint, it absolutely DOES make the traversal
"faster," as measured in megabytes traversed per millisecond. This is a
very important metric.

> I'm suggesting that the disks you were talking about, ie. the 1991
> and the Seagate equivalent, have harsh spinup current requirements

But only for spinup. And once the disk is running, current requirements
drop dramatically.

> ... sit next to one during an expire run on a large news spool.  Remember
> to bring a coffee or three. 8)

Sounds as if storage is poorly arranged and/or fragmented.

--Brett