From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: SATA on mptsas performance Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 01:09:18 -0500 Message-ID: <44053A8E.6000206@pobox.com> References: <43F2DDA7.7050700@web.de> <44051548.9090408@torque.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:9639 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932364AbWCAGJX (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2006 01:09:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <44051548.9090408@torque.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: dougg@torque.net Cc: Mirko Benz , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Douglas Gilbert wrote: > If the SATA disk does 3 Gb/sec then yes but SATA-1 disks > run at 1.5 Gb/sec (and don't have NCQ). When a SAS HBA To further confuse things, "SATA-1", "SATA-2", etc. don't mean much at all. I recommend never using these terms. There are many disks that can do NCQ but not 3 Gb/sec, for example. Its best just to mention the existence of features, because there is no __technical__ definition of "SATA 2" that one can test in software. SATA 2 is just a set of features defined by marketing. Jeff