Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 10 Dec 1999 04:32:35 -0700
From:      Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, des@flood.ping.uio.no (Dag-Erling Smorgrav)
Cc:        andrews@technologist.com, Doug@gorean.org, bright@wintelcom.net, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, doconnor@gsoft.com.au, dscheidt@enteract.com
Subject:   Re: dual 400 -> dual 600 worth it?
Message-ID:  <4.2.0.58.19991210042304.048a2c90@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <199912100213.TAA04264@usr02.primenet.com>
References:  <xzpzovla51w.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 07:13 PM 12/9/1999 , Terry Lambert wrote:

>It's constantly amazing to me that the same people who state
>that FreeBSD should not go after the desktop and should not
>have graphical logins and other destop workstation fluff, are
>the same people who claim that IDE is as good as, or better
>than, SCSI.
>
>Perhaps for a single user workstation, IDE _is_ better than
>SCSI.  All of the benchmarks that claim this are non-concurrent,
>after all, just like the one application likely to be running
>at a time on a single user workstation.
>
>For heavily loaded servers, howwever, there is absolutely no
>comparison: SCSI wins because of concurrency, and latency for
>single-user, single-threaded operations be damned.

I think the real question is, "Can the host CPU provide that 
concurrency as effectively as the embedded CPU in the drive?"

If it can at least get close, one probably won't see a significant
difference in performance; the host CPU will do the same scheduling 
that the embedded processor would, and the raw hardware (the disk 
and heads) will be used about as efficiently. 

I honestly don't know how clever the controllers in Joe SCSI
Drive are, or how boneheaded (or smart!) a UNIX file system can 
be as regards efficient use of the disk, so I'll admit that
I don't know if this is the way it works on a FreeBSD system.
I do suspect that in a RAID system, it might actually be *better* 
to have IDE drives in the array and a SCSI interface to the
computer, since the RAID controller is expected to take
concurrency and head position into account. And the "I" in
RAID does stand for "inexpensive," which means that, these
days, it might as well stand for "IDE."

--Brett



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.0.58.19991210042304.048a2c90>