Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 15:35:16 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb> To: luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it (Luigi Rizzo) Cc: terry@lambert.org, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, koshy@india.hp.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: lmbench IDE anomaly Message-ID: <199605012235.PAA25809@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <199605012113.XAA09988@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> from "Luigi Rizzo" at May 1, 96 11:13:05 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > > Anyway, the results showing SCSI being better than IDE are certainly > > valid. > > So we are back to the regular "SCSI is better than IDE" debate... there is not a debate. my 486dx2-66 with 16MB and scsi drives will perform a "make world" faster than several 586-75's with 16+MB and *IDE* drives. a 586-90, assuming long integer data set of 100kB, is over twice as fast as my cpu. but the ide drives slow the compiles horribly. ( use Hint to get the cpu computation speeds http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/scl/HINT/HINT.html) now maybe its the driver, maybe its the IDE drives themselves. i aint re-writing the ide driver, so i dont care (at this point). dare, jis eyent naw dabayt. -- Jonathan M. Bresler FreeBSD Postmaster jmb@FreeBSD.ORG FreeBSD--4.4BSD Unix for PC clones, source included. http://www.freebsd.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605012235.PAA25809>