Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 18:02:55 -0800 (PST) From: Tom <tom@sdf.com> To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: very slow scsi performance Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980218175802.20776B-100000@misery.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <19980219114036.07982@freebie.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, Greg Lehey wrote: > I forwarded a message to a friend who works at a large computer > manufacturer. Here's his reply. He asked that the name of the > manufacturer not be revealed. ... > > FWIW, IBM isn't perfect. We've had some serious firmware issues with > > them at times, though Seagate is no better, and the 1.6 GB drive we're > > now using as our smallest was initially rather fragile (while the 1.4 > > and 2.1 were solid). This, of course, only applies to the 2.5-inch > > drives, but it's an indication that IBM doesn't walk on water. Based > > upon what I see internally (and I don't see everything), I'd choose > > IBM first, Fujitsu second, Quantum third, and Seagate fourth, but that > > ranking could easily be scrambled if you based it upon individual > > products, rather than overall records. Uhh.. we are talking about SCSI drives here, not IDE. "Large computer manufactures" put cheapo IDE junk in PCs. All the drive manufactures build cheap IDE drives for such "large computer manufacturers". I wouldn't touch either Seagate or IBM IDE drives. Western Digital probably makes the best IDE drives, but that isn't saying much. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.980218175802.20776B-100000>