🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <66ulbh$22l@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, Ron Reaugh <Ron-
Reaugh@worldnet.att.net> writes
>
>
>Milton <m.hewitt@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
><66u25b$30i@mtinsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
>> At precisely, 13 Dec 1997 08:42:34 GMT
>> ID: <66thpq$e4d@mtinsc04.worldnet.att.net>
>> Newsgroup: news:comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
>> 
>> Ron Reaugh proclaimed:
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> >Arnold H Lee <meatball@wam.umd.edu> wrote in article
>> ><34913d16.2409107@news.wam.umd.edu>...
>> >> offhand, scsi prices have dropped dramatically.
>> >> i have managed to buy a 2 gig seagate barracuda (7200 rpm, narrow) for
>> >> only 160. 
>> >
>> >That's a virtually useless drive.  Only a single narrow drive like this
>can
>> >be used bandwidth wise on a SCSI channel. For $160 one can get a 4GB
>EIDE
>> >drive.
>> 
>> A 2 gig Barracuda is a useless drive?
>
>Yep,  a narrow one is.  It uses a high percentage of the available SCSI bus
>bandwidth on a workstation and therefore inhibits the multitasking use of
>additional high performance devices on the same cable.
>
>> Are you *fucking* retarded?
>
>I guess the above describes your intellectual capabilities.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ron Reaugh

-- 
James Bannon

What an interesting conversation this has been! I'm surprised so much heat is
generated when someone gives an host opinion! Here is mine (for what it's
worth).

When looking at a system, you should consider the following:

Application. Is it a server or workstation? For servers, use SCSI (preferably
fast & wide or SCSI-III if you can get it); for workstations, use Ultra-DMA EIDE
as it's cheaper, unless you happen to be running applications demanding higher
bus bandwidths (e.g., Video direct to HD).

[The bit about sustained transfer rates is interesting. Consider SCSI-II: The
maximum theoretical transfer rate of such a device is 10 MB/sec (burst), or
roughly 4 MB/sec sustained, at least according to the official specification.
There is no way that SCSI-II could give 20 MB/sec sustained.]

For server-side applications, you have to be careful about how you attach
devices to the bus. Mixing devices can cause the bus, whatever its
specification, to run at the same speed as the slowest device. I would consider
having multiple controllers on the backplane with the fastest devices on the
same bus. This way, you spread the access load. This also applies incidentally
to certain hard drives, which brings me to my last point.

Now the Seagate Barracuda! This drive is designed to give sustained throughput
of 4 MB/sec; i.e., the fastest a SCSI-II bus can run. At that speed,
interleaving reads/writes from applications with differing requirements is going
to be slower than EIDE, even when using a decent controller. The way to get
around this is to install the drive on a separate controller and reserve the
Barracuda for applications it's designed for, specifically Video transfer direct
to HD. So you see, the Barracuda is not a good device for a general-purpose
workstation!

Cheers!