Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 08:34:44 +1000 From: Da Rock <rock_on_the_web@comcen.com.au> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [OT] Re: SCSI network Message-ID: <1207089284.30698.54.camel@laptop2.herveybayaustralia.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20080401144439.M89952@serwer.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <20080329131542.H80112@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20080331033417.GH28690@dan.emsphone.com> <1206940957.30698.11.camel@laptop2.herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20080331164038.T2059@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <1207039705.30698.48.camel@laptop2.herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20080401144439.M89952@serwer.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 14:45 +0200, User Wojtek wrote: > > May I ask how that works? Everything I've read about scsi is that the > > throughput determines the standard: so 320MB has a throughput of ~320MB. > > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scsi) > > there is a bit (exactly 8 times) difference between megabit and megabyte > Ahh! I see now the reference in the footnote. I was under the impression that the data throughput was measured the same as the throughput for most other data interfaces (USB, Firewire, Ethernet, Serial, Parallel, etc...), hence my confusion. No wonder I've never been that impressed with scsi... Can anyone tell me why this break in convention?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1207089284.30698.54.camel>