🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <21732@brunix.UUCP>, daf@cs.brown.edu (David Fedor) writes:
> Well, I guess I am another victim of the Quantum drive failures.
> I've heard some horror stories about the PROMs that they put
> in, though... things like that it slows down the drive significantly,
> and makes a lot of noise, and fools with the drive at strange times...
> 
> Are these accurate?  If you've had this PROM put in, please let me
> know if it was a good idea.

	If your Quantum drive has failed, your only choice is to get the new
ROM "fix" installed. I had the new ROM put on my Quantum 80 meg 2 months ago
when it failed. My drive is still doing random exercise routines that are
lengthy and noisy. These exercises severely degrade the performance of the 
drive also. I've gotten a few replies from Apple reps on the net, telling
me that a seek/scan test program should be run on the drive when the new ROM
is installed. I've been told two different reasons for why this is supposed
to keep the drive from doing it's random exercises. I've also been told that
the drive should stop doing these routines after "a few weeks" whether the
test program is run or not. It's been two months and mine is still going at
it at random times. I'm still trying to get to the bottom of this situation.

I would like to hear form anyone who's drive has stopped doing it's exercises 
after a few weeks!

GOOD LUCK!!

Here is a graph that illustrates the performance difference during the exercise
routines.



	View the following graph using Monaco 9 point......




20000      |#######
           |        #                        # = NORMAL PERFORMANCE
18000      |          #                      * = DEGRADED PERFORMANCE
           |          #
16000      |          #                 VERTICAL SCALE = KBITS/SEC
           |          #
14000      |           #                HORIZ. SCALE = TRANSFER SIZE (K)
           |           #
12000      |            #
           |            #
10000      |             #
           |              #
 8000      |               ##############################
           |
 6000      |
           |
 4000      |
           |
 2000      |   ******************************************
           |***
           |____________________________________________________
           10   15   20   25   30   35   40   45   50   55   60

This graph was generated using "SCSI evaluator 1.01"


	Peter Espen
	espen@well