Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 15:57:55 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Shapiro <shimon@simon-shapiro.org> To: Tom <tom@sdf.com> Cc: Wee Teck Ng <weeteck@eecs.umich.edu>, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG, "Justin T.Gibbs" <gibbs@plutotech.com> Subject: Re: very slow scsi performance Message-ID: <XFMail.980218155755.shimon@simon-shapiro.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980218152053.20019C-100000@misery.sdf.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18-Feb-98 Tom wrote: > > 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. AFAIK, the DPT firmware handles the IBMs fine. Another DPT advantage (from my point of view); Linking and tagging is done by the firmware. The formware is written by people who have access to a bit more hardware and testing environments than we do. The DPT driver does not attempt tagging. No need to. ---------- Sincerely Yours, Simon Shapiro Shimon@Simon-Shapiro.ORG Voice: 503.799.2313 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?XFMail.980218155755.shimon>