From owner-freebsd-scsi Wed Feb 18 15:39:59 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA12199 for freebsd-scsi-outgoing; Wed, 18 Feb 1998 15:39:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from misery.sdf.com (misery.sdf.com [204.244.213.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA12125 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 1998 15:39:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tom@sdf.com) Received: from tom by misery.sdf.com with smtp (Exim 1.73 #1) id 0y5Iom-0005Jg-00; Wed, 18 Feb 1998 15:22:21 -0800 Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 15:22:20 -0800 (PST) From: Tom To: "Justin T. Gibbs" cc: Wee Teck Ng , freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: very slow scsi performance In-Reply-To: <199802182318.QAA01242@pluto.plutotech.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Justin T. Gibbs wrote: > The problems that have been reported against many IBM drives stem from > the fact that the DQUE bit is set on many OEM models. The current SCSI ... > drives are behaving completely within the bounds of the SCSI spec. CAM > handles this "problem" by honoring the DQUE bit assuming that the user > knows what they are doing. Wait a second... that means that those drives don't support tags at all? Now I'm sure that I don't want IBM drives. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message