From owner-freebsd-stable  Tue Apr  2 12:33:40 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA24101
          for stable-outgoing; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:33:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from kirk.edmweb.com (kirk.edmweb.com [204.244.190.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA24086
          for <stable@FreeBSD.org>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:32:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from steve@localhost) by kirk.edmweb.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA07605; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:31:52 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:31:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Steve Reid <steve@edmweb.com>
To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com>
cc: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au>, Zeki@Dilbert.Oasysinc.com,
        stable@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: SCSI Performance under -stable/-current
In-Reply-To: <199604021811.KAA03701@GndRsh.aac.dev.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960402122554.7593A-100000@kirk.edmweb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > One should always temper theory with reality.  You can go a lot faster by
> > striping your sectors across several surfaces, for example.

> Very very very rare.

I thought having more that one platter would do this?? It doesn't 
actually split one sector over multiple surfaces, but adjacent sectors 
could be (and are?). Can grab several sectors in parallel that way.

Disclaimer: I probably don't know what I'm talking about.