Subject: Re: Haven't they said this before? (was Re: RiscBSD News Server) (fwd)
To: RiscBSD List <port-arm32@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Ben Strawson <B.Strawson@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
List: port-arm32
Date: 01/18/1997 20:46:05
Whoops, forgot to send a copy to the list...damn email software :-(

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Strawson                                            b.strawson@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Department of Computer Science
University College London           http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/students/b.strawson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:44:46 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ben Strawson <zcacbrs@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
To: Markus Baeurle <emw4maba@gp.fht-esslingen.de>
Subject: Re: Haven't they said this before? (was Re: RiscBSD News Server)

On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Markus Baeurle wrote:

> In message <Pine.SGI.3.95L.970113160332.22385F-100000@tower.york.ac.uk>
>           Chris Gilbert <cg110@york.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> > If a fast xfer rate is managed on RapIDE would this be the better medium
> > for baseing a news-server?
> 
> I'd still go for SCSI if I were you, especially now that Mark seems to be
> making progress wrt to the Cumana and Powertec drivers. For them it's probably
> a matter of finding a bug to get DMA transfers going while the RapIDE stuff
> still needs to be developed.
> But that's not the only reason. SCSI is much more expandable for a large-scale
> application like a news server. People have suggested to use two 4GB drives
> instead of one 9GB one and it's not difficult to hit the IDE limit some time
> when you want to add more devices (not only harddisks). You will probably also
> need a backup medium, how do you connect this?
> Go for SCSI which is also a much more reliable thing IMHO because it's been
> more properly developed and tested by many years of use. It's not uncommon to
> get problems with different IDE harddisks connected to the same controller
> which is much more rare for SCSI.

Not just that, but I believe SCSI would work out faster since it does not
load the processor as much as IDE does, though correct me if I am wrong
here.

Ben.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Strawson                                            b.strawson@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Department of Computer Science
University College London           http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/students/b.strawson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------