On Wed, 15 Apr 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Remco Blaakmeer writes: > > > The second thing that you can do is to move up to the new "ultra-DMA" > > > IDE drives. The bandwidth (bytes per second) is much higher than the > > > standard IDE drives and will speed up Linux as a whole. > > > > If you want to really speed up your hard drives, switch to multiple SCSI > > drives. Period. > > > > Yes, to a point! If one is to go all the way, then make it "wide fast SCSI3" > drives which spin at 10,000 rpm and use a PCI based RAID SCSI controller with > _many_ of these GIGAbyte drives! Did anyone mention "myriabucks"? (one > myriabuck = $10,000) 8-) The newer SCSI controllers will handle up to 15 > drives per cable. 8-) (not to mention the startup current blanking out half > a city and the resonances sounding like a jet plane taking off 8-) ) > <Just joking!> In all due seriousness, while an IDE drive will never match a > decent SCSI setup, IDEs are less expensive and "ultra-DMA" IDE drives, IMHO, > represent the most "bang for the buck" (performance for the money) >
hmm... I have 64 megs of EDO RAM and two ~104 meg swap paritions and Linux rarely touches them, and even if it does, it only uses less than 10 megs.. Has Linux decided my 6-year old, 208 meg drive is too slow? I've also had a swap parition on a 3-year old 1.2 WD drive, it's not UDMA, but it is 310% faster than the older drive.. Linux didn't touch that either .. I've even tried to make Linux use it by openning tons of huges X programs (i.e. multiple Netscape windows) and it'd only use about 15 megs at max. I have a 6.4 WD UDMA drive installed now, maybe I should try it out. Is it worth it? BTW- the hdparm -t values for those IDE drives are approximately 1.05 megs/sec, 3.27 megs/sec, 8.51 megs/sec, respectively. -Paul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
