From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Dec 10 16:32:19 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D6515410 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:32:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from noslenj@swbell.net) Received: from swbell.net ([207.193.26.5]) by mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.1999.09.16.21.57.p8) with ESMTP id <0FMJ00BLHW4RFA@mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net> for chat@FreeBSD.ORG; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:31:43 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by swbell.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA16649; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:05:14 -0600 (CST envelope-from noslenj@swbell.net) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:05:14 -0600 (CST) From: Jay Nelson Subject: Re: dual 400 -> dual 600 worth it? In-reply-to: <199912100213.TAA04264@usr02.primenet.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , andrews@technologist.com, Doug@gorean.org, bright@wintelcom.net, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, doconnor@gsoft.com.au, dscheidt@enteract.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Terry Lambert wrote: >> > > Yeah, the new box I'm evaluating has SCA LVD SCSI, and it goes a >> > > lot faster. I'm compiling -Stable and so far -j 6, 8 and 12 have all >> > It _SHOULD_ go faster with SCSI as opposed to (E)IDE/UDMA/etc. [snip] >This means that for server systems, A SCSI drive with a tagged >command queue depth of 128 (common on a number of IBM drives, >just to keep the vendor the same) can support 128 times as much >concurrency as an IDE drive, everything else about the drive >being equal. This may be a stupid question, but would soft updates improve IDE performance in relation to SCSI? Or would it simply block longer less often? -- Jay To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message