[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Two hdds on one channel - why so slow?

On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Mark Hahn wrote:

> yes, I know what he said. it's true that there's no concurrency,
> but he's wrong about expecting half (due to readahead/writebehind),
> and there's no real overhead in switching.
So why my disks work with ~12MB/sec per device (~24 per channel) when
both HDDs are accessed on the sime time?

> in short, master-slave concurrency is not common (but definitely
> supported by the standard and some disks), but this has less
> effect than you'd think. especially since most people just
> treat ide as a single-drive ptp link. which works fine, since
> ide channels cost $15 or less, and ide disks are *so* much cheaper
> than scsi.

Yes. IDE as a PtP device works nice. But this means that in most cases
it is possible to connect only half of expected devices. What a pity :(

Best regards,

Krzysztof Oldzki

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.043 / U:0.312 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site