Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:31:40 -0700 (PDT) From: patl@phoenix.volant.org To: Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Disktab entry for Seagate ST-19171W (Barracuda 9) Message-ID: <ML-3.4.939767500.2102.patl@asimov> In-Reply-To: <19991012234014.04359@uriah.heep.sax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12-Oct-99 at 14:52, J Wunsch (j@uriah.heep.sax.de) wrote: > As patl@phoenix.volant.org wrote: > > > CDB: a 0 8 20 a 0 > > asc 47,0 > > write error: 2048 > > parity error in vendor replacable unit 3 > > Hmm, that's a question to the SCSI experts here. If i read this > correctly, it doesn't mean a parity error in the SCSI transport (which > would be bad cabling etc., and which should cause a parity error > _message_ in response), but rather a parity error inside the target, > reported as an error _condition_ by the target. > > That's probably time to obtain the SCSI reference manual from Seagate > and see for which exact condition they're reporting this error > condition... Maybe it's easier to try reformatting the device first > (which will cause bad block replacement to be performed). It turned out to be cableing after all. The mostly-hidden-by-other- equipment 3' cable that came with the Exabyte turned out on examination to actually be a 2m cable. (Actually 2.05m measured from the tips of the pins) Add in the 3' cable to the disk, and the mandated fraction for each connector/device, and I wind up either right on or just over the maximum allowed cable length. A little creative equipment shuffling to allow the 2m cable to be replaced by another 3' cable; and all is well. I'd still like to find a disktab entry for the Barracuda 9 (ST-19171W). In particular, I'd like advice on the geometry settings. The boot-time probe reports it as: 8683MB (17783112 512 byte sectors: 64H 32 S/T 8683C) But the drive specs indicate 20 heads and only 17773440 sectors. (I won't bother with the track/cylinder count since it appears to vary the number of sectors per track.) I'm guessing that the extra 9672 sectors might be those reserved for bad-block replacement; and that the sector total reported on the Seagate spec page only counted 'user' sectors. (But it would be nice to have that confirmed by someone more knowlegable.) My real question is would I get any performance gain if I change the geometry to 20H to match the drive spec; or should I just leave it at 64H? What would be the potential disadvantages of changing it? Thanks, -Pat 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?ML-3.4.939767500.2102.patl>