Hauke Fath drunkenly mumbled...
> 
> Not quite. Remember, the time of 17 sec/tr ST506 drives is utterly and
> forever gone. ;)

*sigh* yea, i keep forgetting. :)

> "Half of the 4GB disk" is about the outer third of the disk's cylinders.
> With zone bit recorded disks, the physics of this area (spoken in terms of
> data density/bits per inch and data rate/bits per second) is entirely
> different from a full 2 GB disk. With a SCSI ZBR recorded disk you have *no
> way* of accessing "half the heads" to mimic half the capacity as the
> internal data layout is entirely up to the disk.

hmm, hadn't thought of that.  yea, i guess it woulnd't be that easy.  but if
he did do this he would get better results than a 5400rpm and 7200rpm drive
right??  that is where we are headed here anyway.

> And that's a good thing, too, even if UN*X-like OSes (and part of their
> users) still cling to a fifteen-year-old notion of disk technology.

what can i say?? :)

> I.e., if you want to distribute load symmetrically, you have to get disks
> with identical *physical* disk layout and make sure you don't break this
> identity with partitioning.

this is how i would do it personally.  i tend to stick with the same 
manufacturer and model when it comes to RAID/ccd work.   i thought i was
being witty and useful and trying to help, guess i didn't help all that much
afterall. :)  (although i did learn something today, and that is always a Good
Thing(TM))

> Greetings from a Macintosh greyscale full page display. =8)

:)

-brian

-- 
** Brian Hechinger ** wonko@mail.arkham.net ** http://www.arkham.net **
--
"Color is for web wanking.  mono is for writing code.  Gimme a Mono Sun 3 and 
an expresso machine any day :-)"

						-Bob Beck