On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:17:51PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
Do you plan on updating your AHCI NCQ patch found in
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jgarzik/libata/archive/
It no longer applies cleanly to the latest 2.6.15.x kernel.
No, but, Jens
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 02:29:15AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote:
Is NCQ supported when setting the controller to JBOD instead of using HW
raid?
1) The two have nothing to do with each other
2) It sounds like you haven't yet read
Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 02:29:15AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote:
Is NCQ supported when setting the controller to JBOD instead of using HW
raid?
1) The two have nothing to do with each other
2) It sounds like you haven't yet read
Steve Byan wrote:
On Mar 3, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Steve Byan wrote:
it. It works OK for reads. TCQ was really invented as a way to
allow CD-ROM drives to play nice on the same ATA bus as disks.
Disagree, you are probably thinking about bus disconnect associated
with
On Mar 3, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Steve Byan wrote:
it. It works OK for reads. TCQ was really invented as a way to
allow CD-ROM drives to play nice on the same ATA bus as disks.
Disagree, you are probably thinking about bus disconnect associated
with the overlapped command
On Mar 4, 2006, at 2:10 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Steve Byan wrote:
Data integrity -and- performance. Performance increases for all
the standard reasons that an asynchronous pipeline increases
performance over a synchronous one.
The write cache means that requests on the device can be
Is NCQ supported when setting the controller to JBOD instead of using HW raid?
On 3/5/06, Eric D. Mudama [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/4/06, Steve Byan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 4, 2006, at 2:10 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Measurements on NCQ in the field show a distinct performance
Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote:
Is NCQ supported when setting the controller to JBOD instead of using HW raid?
1) The two have nothing to do with each other
2) It sounds like you haven't yet read
http://linux-ata.org/faq-sata-raid.html
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On Mar 1, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01 2006, Mark Lord wrote:
NCQ vs. TCQ: NCQ has a much more efficient low-level protocol,
making the host-side (controller, operating-system) quite a bit
simpler than with NCQ.
Or in laymens terms - TCQ sucks and NCQ doesn't :-)
NCQ
(don't top post)
On Thu, Mar 02 2006, Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote:
i can see the NCQ realy bother people.
i am using a promise card sata TX4 150.
does any of you has a patch for the driver
so it would support NCQ ?
I don't know of any documentation for the promise cards (or whether they
Jens Axboe wrote:
(don't top post)
On Thu, Mar 02 2006, Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote:
i can see the NCQ realy bother people.
i am using a promise card sata TX4 150.
does any of you has a patch for the driver
so it would support NCQ ?
I don't know of any documentation for the promise cards
Thank you Mr Garzik.
Is there a list of all drivers and there features they give ?
Raz.
On 3/2/06, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jens Axboe wrote:
(don't top post)
On Thu, Mar 02 2006, Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote:
i can see the NCQ realy bother people.
i am using a promise
Mark Lord wrote:
Gentoopower wrote:
Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote:
i am thinking of buying a promise card sataII pcix.
they have two types, a card which support NCQ
and another that does not.
What is the bennifit of buying a card with NCQ tagging ?
How about:
On Wed, Mar 01 2006, Gentoopower wrote:
I have two seagates in my box a 160GB 7200.7 and 160GB 7200.9(SATAII
NCQ), using NFORCE4.
I can defintely feel the speed difference between the two drives.
Well that can't be because of NCQ, since it isn't active :-)
P.S. Just waiting to see NCQ
Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01 2006, Gentoopower wrote:
P.S. Just waiting to see NCQ support for my nforce system in libata:-)
Don't hold your breath, it's unlikely to get supported as nvidia wont
open the specs. ahci is a really really nice controller, if you want ncq
I suggest going with
On Wed, Mar 01 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01 2006, Gentoopower wrote:
P.S. Just waiting to see NCQ support for my nforce system in libata:-)
Don't hold your breath, it's unlikely to get supported as nvidia wont
open the specs. ahci is a really really nice
16 matches
Mail list logo
