Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: devfs | From | (Joseph H. Buehler) | Date | 13 Jan 1998 18:35:56 -0500 |
| |
Bob Tracy <rct@gherkin.sa.wlk.com> writes:
> Gotta comment on this... Is there anyone reading this who believes that > the c?t?d?s? SCSI device naming scheme originated with Sun and HP? The > "one true UNIX(tm)" as inherited/purchased/acquired/stolen/borrowed from > AT&T has had this naming scheme since at least SVr?. If those who are > promulgating a gratuitously different naming scheme are doing so out of > a desire to spite Solaris, they are misguided or at least ignorant of > UN*X history. Bottom line: IMNSHO the current argument over the naming > of devices is rehashing old territory except for the valid point that > existing naming schemes didn't anticipate the notions of multi-channel > controllers and RAID devices. Anything we come up with now will more than > likely be found insufficient 15+ years later. (How old *is* System V > anyway?) I look forward to the changes that will make that "problem" a > reality :-).
It has been around since svr3, at least.
As far as having multiple SCSI channels per controller, you can do that by having more than 7 or 8 targets per controller:
c0t0d0s0 ... c0t7d0s0 c0t8d0s0 ... c0tfd0s0
or maybe split the channel number out as a separate digit after "t"...
Joe Buehler
| |