On Tue, 6 Jun 2000 willy@thepuffingroup.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 03:32:18PM +0200, scoetzee@voltex.co.za wrote:
> > this is fine, as you can always add more controllers, but theoretically (never
> > tried myself)
> > you can attach 32 SCSI 3 devices to a scsi3 bus.
>
> but i've never understood _why_. if you read the docs from, say, SGI,
> they recommend not putting more than 4 drives on a chain as they will have
> completely saturated the bandwidth. if your devices aren't high-enough
> bandwidth to saturate the bus, then why not put them on a cheaper bus
> with more controllers (like, er, IDE).
>
Depends on usage. SCSI has good characteristics for mass throughput/low
drive count, or interactive usage/high drive count (if it is all home
directories you might _need_ 32 big drives, but never max your bandwidth).
If you try doing that with ATA you would need 7 or 8 free slots
_just_for_drive_controllers_. Not to mention interrupts and interrupt
loading (you would need a much faster CPU to deal with the IDE case).
However, for a single user workstation/home system, one or two nice
ATA drives are just the ticket.
Daniel Taylor Embedded and custom Linux integration.
dante@plethora.net (612)747-1609
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:26 EST