From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Nov 6 20:46:20 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id UAA09094 for chat-outgoing; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 20:46:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat) Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09088 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 20:46:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from toor@dyson.iquest.net) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) id XAA00456; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 23:43:28 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" Message-Id: <199711070443.XAA00456@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: hardware In-Reply-To: <199711070150.MAA00407@word.smith.net.au> from Mike Smith at "Nov 7, 97 12:20:30 pm" To: mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 23:43:28 -0500 (EST) Cc: chris@netmonger.net, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Mike Smith said: > > I'll stop here. You do that. Then we can talk. Until then, for > crying out loud, consider listening to people that _have_. If you > don't trust me, try Soren (who has one of the faster worldbuilders > running on IDE disks), or John Dyson (who had six IDE disks in a system > at one stage, running ~10MB/sec sustained), or John Hood (who did the > DMA work). > I do think that it is best to stay un-religious. A good rule of thumb would likely include that a typical IDE config tends to be lower end than a SCSI config. It is also likely that a SCSI system will be higher performance than an IDE system. The criteria for (adequate) performance is continually getting higher, and for my typical single user, overloaded, workstation use, IDE is adequate. I wouldn't dream of putting IDE in a middle or high end server though. I have a certain attitude about all of this PC hardware, and that is it is all throw-away -- the less you spend on hardware that works for you, the better off that you are... The only winchester disk devices that I consider to be not-throw away are the high-end SCSI's. I just don't need the perf of a 10K or a high-end 7.2K drive. I am mostly CPU-bound with my workload on my mostly-IDE workstation with 2 PPro's. Specify a database, news or medium to large server app, or a system that needs to be a little more reliable or needs more space/speed than an IDE based solution, then SCSI is the best way to go. -- John dyson@freebsd.org jdyson@nc.com