From owner-freebsd-scsi  Thu Mar 18 17: 7:47 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
Received: from milf18.bus.net (milf18.bus.net [207.41.25.18])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AF59154CD
	for <freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 18 Mar 1999 17:07:43 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from cao@milf18.bus.net)
Received: (from cao@localhost)
	by milf18.bus.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA27680;
	Thu, 18 Mar 1999 20:07:05 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from cao)
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 20:07:05 -0500
From: "Chuck O'Donnell" <cao@bus.net>
To: Kurt Seel <kseel@utcorp.com>
Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: buslogic bt958
Message-ID: <19990318200704.B27547@milf18.bus.net>
References: <36F18A72.CCF75506@utcorp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95i
In-Reply-To: <36F18A72.CCF75506@utcorp.com>; from Kurt Seel on Thu, Mar 18, 1999 at 06:21:22PM -0500
Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

On Thu, Mar 18, 1999 at 06:21:22PM -0500, Kurt Seel wrote:
> 
> Is the bt 958 still a viable card? I have a couple and would like to
> use them in my webserver. I am looking for _performance_, would I be
> better off with an adaptek 2940UW?
> I want to run a stripe across 2 or 3 cheetah's
> 

I just set up two new servers using the BT-958:

bt0: <Buslogic Multi-Master SCSI Host Adapter> rev 0x08 ...
bt0: BT-958 FW Rev. 5.07B Ultra Wide SCSI Host Adapter, SCSI ID 7, 192 CCBs

I've had some trouble with errors related to the tagged
queuing. Doesn't seem to be a show stopper, as you can add a quirk
entry to abate the problem.

See thread "error messages from bt driver" in the scsi archives (last
week?).

I haven't done any performance testing, I guess I was more interested
in reliability.

On a side note, I've never had a stitch of trouble from the Adaptec
2940's.

Thanks.

Chuck


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