🚀 go-pugleaf

In message <4ggore$b0s@news4.digex.net> - John Kheit
<jkheit@cnj.digex.net> wri
tes:
:>
:>jcorigan@teleport.com (John Corrigan) wrote:
:>> I recently benched a 2940 with a Seagate Hawk (2GB, 5400RPM,
:>> SCSI2-F) and it showed transfer rates of 6.7MB/sec for both reads
:>> and writes for file sizes up to 4MB.  (The benchmark creates the
:>> file and times the write speed and the read speed, the tests were
:>> done with no software disk caching).  Sounds to me like there
:>> isn't much of a benefit to going to SCSI2-UW :)
:>
:>Under most DOS benchmarks I get rediculous read/write performance
:>reports.  My barracuda also gets around 6.7m/sec (and its not wide
:>or anything)...  Under NeXTSTEP (i.e. Unix variant) and using IOzone
:>(an excellent benchmark, don't know if it exists for other OS's)
:>I get more accurate reports around 2m/sec.

Do faster/wider busses help for 1 drive anyway?  I don't think there
are any drives w/ a media rate above 10 MB/S.  Maybe the benchmarks 
should be run on several drives at the same time.

Mike Graham
lmg@vnet.net