Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 21:42:46 +1000 From: Stephen McKay <syssgm@detir.qld.gov.au> To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG, syssgm@detir.qld.gov.au Subject: Re: Strange SCSI QIC tape behaviour Message-ID: <199903131142.VAA24110@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9903120837550.216-100000@feral-gw> from Matthew Jacob at "Fri, 12 Mar 1999 08:39:59 -0800" References: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9903120837550.216-100000@feral-gw>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, 12th March 1999, Matthew Jacob wrote: >> So, is this the most bizarre drive on Earth, or perhaps are there bugs in >> the SCSI tape driver that need addressing? At the very least, the fixed >> block size for QIC tapes should be 1024 not 512 for densities above QIC-320. > >Yes, that's a bug for me to address. Where is this piece of information >from? Jörg described the situation quite well. But if you want to see Tandberg's view on it, read http://www.tandberg.com/download/manuals/42304206.pdf. It looks quite detailed and comprehensive. For the rest of their QIC info try http://www.tandberg.com/slr/slr_docs.html. So, do you think the other problems I raised are possible bugs, or simply drive quirks? For example, if I read a fixed blocked tape in variable block mode it works (a bit of a surprise) but is very slow. When I tell it to use fixed blocks (1024 bytes) it works at full speed. The driver never works it out for itself. Stephen. 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?199903131142.VAA24110>