Thus spake Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Actually, not even then. Modern IDE drives only write entire tracks at a
time. If you modify a single sector, then the drive has to read the entire
track into the buffer, in-place edit the sector, and then rewrite the entir
e
track.
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Doug Barton wrote:
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Kenneth Culver wrote:
I'd probably steer clear of the western digital drives as well. Yes the
make that stear clear.
Ummm... why? steer is a word with multiple meanings. I can't find
stear anywhere.
Mu.
-Nate
To
David Schultz wrote:
Thus spake Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Actually, not even then. Modern IDE drives only write entire tracks at a
time. If you modify a single sector, then the drive has to read the entire
track into the buffer, in-place edit the sector, and then rewrite the entir
You might want to give that a bit of thought. IBM, while producing OK
scsi disks, has had a really terrible headache getting reliability into
their IDE products. Additionally, IBM just sold their entire hard disk
product line to some other company. I don't know if that had anything to
do
I'd probably steer clear of the western digital drives as well. Yes the
make that stear clear.
8MB cache that some of them have DOES make a difference, but from personal
experience, the drives themselves don't last that long. So in short, what
good is a fast hard-drive if it's just going to
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 01:42, Kenneth Culver wrote:
I'd probably steer clear of the western digital drives as well. Yes the
8MB cache that some of them have DOES make a difference, but from personal
experience, the drives themselves don't last that long. So in short, what
good is a fast
I haven't had any trouble with the WDxxxBB drives - the WDxxxAA drives
are pretty unreliable though.
Hrmm, I havn't tried those, but just about every WD drive I've used has
ended up with problems which were of course handled by the warranty, but
even then, I still had to reinstall the os and
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 01:54, Kenneth Culver wrote:
I haven't had any trouble with the WDxxxBB drives - the WDxxxAA drives
are pretty unreliable though.
Hrmm, I havn't tried those, but just about every WD drive I've used has
ended up with problems which were of course handled by the
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Kenneth Culver wrote:
I'd probably steer clear of the western digital drives as well. Yes the
make that stear clear.
Ummm... why? steer is a word with multiple meanings. I can't find
stear anywhere.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
Yes, but my point is that the AA drives are bad, but the BB drives seem
good. I have been using them for a while (~1 year) without trouble.
I believe the JB drives are much more closely related to the BB drives
(ie effectively identical but with a bigger cache).
Personally I find that no HD
Ummm... why? steer is a word with multiple meanings. I can't find
stear anywhere.
well, lets just say that my brain is fried b/c of midterms. OK? :-P
Ken
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Kenneth Culver wrote:
Ummm... why? steer is a word with multiple meanings. I can't find
stear anywhere.
well, lets just say that my brain is fried b/c of midterms. OK? :-P
Ah, you are forgiven then... go and sin no more. :)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
Howdy Crew,
I am about to buy a new hard disk for my FreeBSD work station.
Since FreeBSD's ATA drivers implement Tagged Command Queuing and IBM make
the only ATA disks that implement tagged command queuing ( ie since the 60GXP family
),
an IBM 40GB 120GXP looks like the best solution.
On 29 Oct 2002, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 01:54, Kenneth Culver wrote:
I haven't had any trouble with the WDxxxBB drives - the WDxxxAA drives
are pretty unreliable though.
Hrmm, I havn't tried those, but just about every WD drive I've used has
ended up with
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 02:40, Chuck Robey wrote:
Personally I find that no HD manufacturer has a good reputation - they
have all made trashy drives at one point. Give the general time it takes
for problems to surface vs product lifetimes makes deciding what to buy
a PITA :(
No, I'd take
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 02:40, Chuck Robey wrote:
Personally I find that no HD manufacturer has a good reputation - they
have all made trashy drives at one point. Give the general time it takes
for problems to surface vs product lifetimes makes deciding what to buy
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
As you can imagine, this violates the basic assumptions of FFS and softdep.
They assume that only sectors that are written to are at risk, and do all
their ordering based on that assumption. But the assumption is completely
bogus. Even with no-caching it doesn't work
.@babolo.ru wrote:
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
As you can imagine, this violates the basic assumptions of FFS and softdep.
They assume that only sectors that are written to are at risk, and do all
their ordering based on that assumption. But the assumption is completely
bogus. Even with
18 matches
Mail list logo
