[lkml]   [1997]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: IDE Disk Problems
    On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 wrote:


    > I have read a number of messages related to the quality of IDE drives
    > and WD drives in particular and I believe that I have to respond to give
    > the other side of the story.
    > I have had what I consider to be a reasonable amount of sys-admin
    > experience (including running an ISP for over a year). Currently I run
    > 3 OS/2 servers, 5 Linux servers, 2 NT servers, and quite a few
    > workstations. All the OS/2 and Linux machines have IDE hard drives,
    > most of the hard drives are WD (about 10 WD drives in operation now, but
    > I've gone got rid of a few of the smaller ones - 340meg drives aren't
    > much use now). I have not had a single problem with a WD drive that
    > could be attributed to the drive (mis-use of `rm` doesn't count as a
    > drive problem). However with the NT systems running SCSI drives
    > (Seagate and Maxtor drives mainly with Adaptec, NCR, and DPT
    > controllers) I have had heaps of problems. Strange crashes on boot,
    > data loss in running system, systems booting up and suddenly crashing
    > when previously they had worked fine.

    Now you're comparing NT with Linux. There is a stability differnce you
    know. I've had the same thing happen on NT with IDE drives, so the problem
    is IMHO NT, and not the disks.

    > Based on the experiences with SCSI the client has now decided to save
    > money and buy IDE - the extra money they spent on SCSI wasn't getting
    > them any extra performance or reliability.
    > As for performance, I recall seeing a message from Mark Lord saying
    > that in most Linux systems you won't gain anything from SCSI. Save the
    > $300 on a SCSI controller and get 64meg of RAM - it'll make your system
    > faster and more reliable than SCSI.

    That depends. If it's a multiuser system things like tagged command
    queueing will give you much better concurrency on a SCSI disk. SCSI also
    gives a lower bus load, leaving more CPU time available for processes. I
    have a 3 year old IBM spitfire on an Adaptec 2940, with a 486 CPU acting
    as a fileserver that outperforms most pentiums with IDE drives, especialy
    when users access it concurrently.

    On the other hand if you have a single user desktop machine the extra
    money is probably wasted.

    > Russell Coker

    Hugo Van den Berg -
    Phone - +31 (0)30 - 60 25 400
    Fax - +31 (0)30 - 60 50 799

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.021 / U:16.956 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site