Messages in this thread | | | From | (bill davidsen) | Subject | Re: libata in 2.4.24? | Date | 2 Dec 2003 23:18:24 GMT |
| |
In article <20031202230216.GB4154@mis-mike-wstn.matchmail.com>, Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> wrote: | On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 10:34:20PM +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote: | > after each O_SYNC write, so that's probably not practical. Clearly the | > best solution is a full SCSI implementation over PATA/SATA, but that | > would eliminate some of the justification for SCSI devices at premium | > prices. | | In many ways, that is exactly what SATA is. :)
Until multiple devices be string are available SATA will have logistical problems scaling. The small cable is an advantage running a few drives in a box, but a server with 40 drives or so would go from a cable bundle out the back, about 5cm by 1 cm, to a real bunch of those little round cables running everywhere. Certainly doable, but I think I'd name the server "Medusa" if I built it.
I believe SATA-2 will address this, if I may believe what's projected for an unwritten standard. -- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |