From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Oct 29 2:31:53 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE2237B401 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 02:31:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (12-232-220-15.client.attbi.com [12.232.220.15]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D68643E6E for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 02:31:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g9TAVhTx018890; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 02:31:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU) Received: (from das@localhost) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) id g9TAVXvk018889; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 02:31:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU) Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 02:31:33 -0800 From: David Schultz To: Peter Wemm Cc: "Daniel O'Connor" , Chuck Robey , Kenneth Culver , "Wilkinson, Alex" , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ? Message-ID: <20021029103133.GA18812@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: Peter Wemm , Daniel O'Connor , Chuck Robey , Kenneth Culver , "Wilkinson, Alex" , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG References: <1035861964.77698.83.camel@chowder.localdomain> <20021029042415.967662A88D@canning.wemm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021029042415.967662A88D@canning.wemm.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Thus spake Peter Wemm : > 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