Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's

From: Matthias Urlichs (smurf@noris.de)
Date: Fri Mar 09 2001 - 09:26:59 EST

Next message: Mike Galbraith: "Re: Ramdisk (and other) problems with 2.4.2"
Previous message: Andrew Morton: "[patch] printk.c"
In reply to: Jens Axboe: "Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's"
Next in thread: Jonathan Morton: "Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi,

Jens Axboe:
> > But most disks these days support IDE-SCSI, and SCSI does have ordered
> > tags, so...
>
> Any proof to back this up? To my knowledge, only some WDC ATA disks
> can be ATAPI driven.
>
Ummm, no, but that was my impression. If that's wrong, I apologize and
will state the opposite, next time.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs     |     noris network AG     |     http://smurf.noris.de/
-- 
You see things; and you say 'Why?'
But I dream things that never were; and I say 'Why not?'
               --George Bernard Shaw [Back to Methuselah]
-
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/

Next message: Mike Galbraith: "Re: Ramdisk (and other) problems with 2.4.2"
Previous message: Andrew Morton: "[patch] printk.c"
In reply to: Jens Axboe: "Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's"
Next in thread: Jonathan Morton: "Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 15 2001 - 21:00:10 EST