From owner-freebsd-chat  Thu Nov  6 09:00:54 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA27556
          for chat-outgoing; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 09:00:54 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (word.smith.net.au [202.0.75.3])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27534
          for <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org>; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 09:00:44 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from mike@word.smith.net.au)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost.smith.net.au [127.0.0.1])
	by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA00276;
	Fri, 7 Nov 1997 03:26:40 +1030 (CST)
Message-Id: <199711061656.DAA00276@word.smith.net.au>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: chris@netmonger.net (Christopher Masto)
cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: hardware 
In-reply-to: Your message of "06 Nov 1997 16:04:21 GMT."
             <63spq5$6j7$1@schenectady.netmonger.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 03:26:37 +1030
From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> Dunno, I tend to agree with the SCSI advice for a couple of reasons.
> Having a FreeBSD box at home (from 2.0 through 3.0) with IDE, and
> several SCSI-based machines at work, it seems to me that the IDE is
> slowing my system down quite a bit.  

"seems"?  Have you ever bothered to benchmark this?  Are you comparing 
apples with apples?

Perhaps I should have posted over my other signature, the one that says 
"high-speed data acquisition and realtime instrument control"?  I *do* 
try to keep a reasonable eye on things that impact on storage.  8)

> The drive seems to just run a lot
> more, particularly when doing something like a CVS checkout.  IIRC,
> IDE was basically a coupling of the ISA bus to a hard drive, and
> doesn't have nearly as much brains in the drive or controller as SCSI.

You don't RC.  IDE moved the register set of the WD1003 onto the disk; 
arguably a Bad Idea but see my response to Joerg for commentary on 
progress lately.  The "smarts" in an IDE and SCSI disk are prettymuch 
comparable.

> The other reason I think SCSI is a good idea is that you can get a
> SCSI tape or Jaz drive or something. 

You can get ATAPI devices like these too.  I don't recommend that.  8)

> I'm currently struggling with
> the decision to dig into the kernel and get my Exabyte Eagle TR-3
> "floppy tape" working under FreeBSD, or to just go SCSI and "get a
> real tape drive".  I wish I hadn't tried to save a few bucks in the
> first place - the money I've wasted in upgrading and replacing IDE
> drives would easily cover the cost difference of having gone with SCSI
> in the first place.

Uh, "floppy tape" != IDE.  And if you're talking about IDE disks you 
must be buyin' the gold plated ones.
 
> Your mileage may vary (and apparently does).

Please note my original perspective; IDE is price-performance very 
competitive with SCSI, and becoming more so.  IDE disks have reached 
the point where they can be *seriously* considered for new systems in 
classes other than "very cheap".  

People making impassioned arguments based on their experience "years 
ago" are strongly urged to reevaluate this technology at their leisure. 
No promises are made as to absolute results, merely that consideration 
for these disks should *not* be summarily dismissed as is the vogue.

mike