Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 29 Oct 2002 02:31:33 -0800
From:      David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU>
To:        Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
Cc:        "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>, Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org>, Kenneth Culver <culverk@yumyumyum.org>, "Wilkinson, Alex" <Alex.Wilkinson@dsto.defence.gov.au>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?
Message-ID:  <20021029103133.GA18812@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <20021029042415.967662A88D@canning.wemm.org>
References:  <1035861964.77698.83.camel@chowder.localdomain> <20021029042415.967662A88D@canning.wemm.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>:
> Actually, not even then.  Modern IDE drives only write entire tracks at a 
> time.  If you modify a single sector, then the drive has to read the entire
> track into the buffer, in-place edit the sector, and then rewrite the entire
> track.
[...]
> And that completely blows FFS's assumptions out of the water.  And what
> is sad is that many SCSI disks are similar these days.  But not all of
> them (I'm told).

I've heard this before.  It would be very useful to have
information about which drives have this misfeature, but I guess
it isn't the sort of thing that hard drive manufacturers like to
advertise.  Does anyone have any data on track-writing drives?

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021029103133.GA18812>