Re: libata in 2.4.24?

[davidsen@tmr.com (bill davidsen)]

In article <20031202230216.GB4154@mis-mike-wstn.matchmail.com>,
Mike Fedyk  <mfedyk@matchmail.com> wrote:
| On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 10:34:20PM +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:
| > after each O_SYNC write, so that's probably not practical. Clearly the
| > best solution is a full SCSI implementation over PATA/SATA, but that
| > would eliminate some of the justification for SCSI devices at premium
| > prices.
| 
| In many ways, that is exactly what SATA is. :)

Until multiple devices be string are available SATA will have logistical
problems scaling. The small cable is an advantage running a few drives
in a box, but a server with 40 drives or so would go from a cable bundle
out the back, about 5cm by 1 cm, to a real bunch of those little round
cables running everywhere. Certainly doable, but I think I'd name the
server "Medusa" if I built it.

I believe SATA-2 will address this, if I may believe what's projected
for an unwritten standard.
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.