Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 12:11:33 +1000 From: George Michaelson <ggm@connect.com.au> To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" <michaelv@mindbender.serv.net> Cc: Drew Derbyshire <ahd@kew.com>, Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: lousy disk perf. under cpu load (was IDE vs SCSI) Message-ID: <26957.873684693@connect.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 07 Sep 1997 18:34:18 MST." <199709080134.SAA09715@MindBender.serv.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At last some sanity! Nobody doubts that there are specific preferences when you have a blank sheet to purchase. What mattered to me (when I first posted about the DMA issues with the IDE driver) was an *existing* config which was (E)IDE. I am very happy that people think server systems, especially where disk-count is greater than 2 should be on SCSI. I am very happy that people doing reliable or mission-critical spec their machines to use best-practice hardware and software. I am also happy that device driver writers are looking at poor saps like me who have blown this years computer-budget on an unexpected car transmission failure, and can't walk away from their (E)IDE investment for a while longer. FreeBSD *has* to be about the best possible service in the worst imaginable hardware as well as the best possible service in the dream configuration. The exceptions should be as minimal as possible: 386 is the lowest CPU, MCA may be somewhat 'interesting' (Noting a NetBSD project which makes it work) but nobody deliberately makes it non-functional on middle-of-the-road boxen. Otherwise its a rich playground and not UNIX for the masses. cheers -George -- George Michaelson | connect.com.au pty/ltd Email: ggm@connect.com.au | c/o AAPT, Phone: +61 7 3834 9976 | level 8, the Riverside Centre, Fax: +61 7 3834 9908 | 123 Eagle St, Brisbane QLD 4000
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?26957.873684693>