From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 28 15:03:21 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org 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 4045B16A4DA for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 15:03:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df@mired.org) Received: from mired.org (vpn.mired.org [66.92.153.74]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 98B3E43D6B for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 15:03:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df@mired.org) Received: (qmail 74367 invoked by uid 1001); 28 Jul 2006 15:03:19 -0000 Received: by bhuda.mired.org (tmda-sendmail, from uid 1001); Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:03:17 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17610.10037.669199.494402@bhuda.mired.org> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:03:17 -0400 To: rick-freebsd@kiwi-computer.com In-Reply-To: <20060728144310.GA58252@megan.kiwi-computer.com> References: <20060727180412.GB48057@megan.kiwi-computer.com> <17609.1474.618423.970137@bhuda.mired.org> <44C910BE.9000108@dial.pipex.com> <20060727185721.GC25626@manor.msen.com> <17609.9516.506115.204334@bhuda.mired.org> <44C93454.5020404@dial.pipex.com> <17609.16421.670624.80289@bhuda.mired.org> <44C953BA.4070008@dial.pipex.com> <20060728011343.GB51284@megan.kiwi-computer.com> <17609.26997.176143.224198@bhuda.mired.org> <20060728144310.GA58252@megan.kiwi-computer.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid X-Primary-Address: mwm@mired.org X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`; h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.0.3 (Seattle Slew) From: Mike Meyer Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: disklabel differences FreeBSD, DragonFly X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 15:03:21 -0000 In <20060728144310.GA58252@megan.kiwi-computer.com>, Rick C. Petty typed: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 09:33:41PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote: > > "Small disk drive" means "smaller than any drive I can buy at the > > local Best Buy/Circuit City/CompUSA/similar". At the time, I needed an > > 80GB drive, and paid about $60 for it. > Well then your comparison isn't really fair.. Sure, a brand new hard drive > from a retail outlet is more expensive than a 10-year-old box (especially > if the box is refurbished). Um, I didn't buy the drive from a retail outlet. It was defined as small *because* it's to old and small for the retail outlets to carry it. Yes, it's not as old as the systems I bought, but it's the price point I had. I bought it through a price comparison engine; I'd have to dig through my records to find out who the actual seller was. > No surprise there! I thought we were comparing oranges and oranges. > In that case, check out www.geeks.com (the old computergeeks), they > have a number of drives for sale under $49.95. The oranges we are comparing are "acceptable solutions to wanting to isolate subsystems." The original solution was to buy modern disks, and put lots of partitions on them. My proposed solution is to buy a number of cheap boxes. A cheaper solution (the cheapest?) is to buy lots of small, cheap disks. (and before somebody brings it up, the costs involved only include the up-front cost.) They all have their tradeoffs, but the point I made is that objecting to my solution over the original one because of price doesn't carry that much weight. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.