Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 22:10:02 +0400 From: "Andrew" <infofarmer@mail.ru> To: <pms2-freebsd@sommerhein.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: SOLVED: Second harddrive as slave on ata0 (UDMA100) or as master on ata1(UDMA33)? Message-ID: <003201c4683b$73ffa730$0111a8c0@SATPC> References: <20040712082002.GA50674@sommerhein.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Martin Sommerhein wrote: > I am managing a remote machine where a second harddrive was added for me > by the hosting company. I noticed that the second harddrive had been > added as slave on the first IDE controller (ata0). As I assumed I would > get better performance by having it as master on the second controller > (ata1), I asked them to move the second drive over to the second master > controller (ata1). So was done, but then I found that the same disk > showed up as UDMA33 compared to UDMA100 when added as a slave to the > first controller (ata0). > > So the question is, what will give me the best performance, having it on > the second master with UDMA33 or as a slave on the first controller as > UDMA100? Your hosting company seems to have used an UDMA33 IDE cable for the second hard drive. If they cannot find another U100 cable, then you'd better ask them to put both drives on one U100 cable. You'll get better performance this way. > PS: Should this have been sent to freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org so please > tell me? I doubt it very much that this question has anything to do with FreeBSD at all. Have a nice, Andrew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?003201c4683b$73ffa730$0111a8c0>