Re: Two hdds on one channel - why so slow?

Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2002-01-05T11:59:06Z

If you don't want to read such words, please use a Killfile.
X-Copyright: (C) 1996-2002 Henning Schmiedehausen
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.1 (NOV)

Dana Lacoste <dana.lacoste@peregrine.com> writes:

>Also the bandwidth differences :

>Firewire (Generation 1, what you can get now) is 400Mbit/s
>FC Gen 1 is 100MByte/s
>Gen 2 is 200MByte/s
>(OK, I know those last two numbers are right, but I don't
>know what the NAMES of the standards are :)

>Firewire isn't even supposed to be in the same league! :)

That wasn't supposed of IDE in the war against SCSI either, but look
where we're now. :-)

The one argument that noone brought around here is (and it is the
killer argument for me in IDE vs. SCSI): "external disk trays". Try
that with IDE (current IDE please. No SerialATA. ;-) ) without lots of
"out of spec" cables dangling out of your "enterprise computing
solution".

If you need more than say, three or four disks, your solution is
SCSI. Or FibreChannel.

Regards
Henning

--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- Geschaeftsfuehrer
INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH hps@intermeta.de

Am Schwabachgrund 22 Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0 info@intermeta.de
D-91054 Buckenhof Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20