Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:50:49 +0200 (CEST) From: Remy Nonnenmacher <remy@synx.com> To: ken@plutotech.com Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Huge SCSI configs Message-ID: <199904131750.TAA36976@rt2.synx.com> In-Reply-To: <199904131739.LAA03759@panzer.plutotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 13 Apr, Kenneth D. Merry wrote: > > Yes, there are certainly problems with Quantum disks. The main problem is > that they continually return Queue Full, until we reduce the number of > transactions queued to the device to the minimum (2). > > We get around this problem in the Atlas 2 and 3 by setting the minimum > number of transactions to 24. It would probably be better if you just > avoid Quantum disks and go for IBM instead. > Hiiirk. good queing is _required_. Okay Okay. Let's IBM....(also a personnal preference). >> >> >From a pure performance POV, this is not really cutting-edge depending >> on a good access repartition algo (100x10Mb ~ 125MB/s ~ 31MB/chain) and >> adding chains is easy. Need only to keep things busy. > > Ahh, okay. So your performance requirements aren't too bad. You probably > won't be able to get 100 10Mb/sec streams of video out of one Gigabit > Ethernet interface, though. You'll probably want to divide it over two > interfaces. > Video stream is took from the SCSI chain. The OS machine is only a one side. The GigaEthernet is only here for the fun.... > > Certainly sounds interesting. > As this machine will sit idling for one or two months, i though that it may be interesting to make it available for FS and drivers writers to stress it.... A low-cost contribution for those interested. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904131750.TAA36976>