Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:57:38 -0500 From: Tom Embt <tom@embt.com> To: Arcady Genkin <a.genkin@utoronto.ca> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: One drive much slower than another Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19991222135738.014684a0@mail.embt.com> In-Reply-To: <87vh5s59yk.fsf@main.wgaf.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't your Bigfoot have a couple years advantage over the WD? RPMs are fine but there are lots of other things that affect disk performance which often get overlooked. The Bigfoot probably has much higher areal and track density than the old Caviar. For example, IBM's IDE Deskstar drives have gone through several "generations", including: ?? DHEA DTTA DJNA DPTA with the last three all being available in both 5400 and 7200RPM versions. Sequention I/O performance varies *greatly* between different ends of the scale. Tom Embt tom@embt.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.3.32.19991222135738.014684a0>