> They will go on a machine with 3 200m ide drives, which will be a poor-man's
> server. My current thinking is to mount / on the first controller, and
> use the other pair as /usr on the second interface. /usr will be NFS
> exported. Or would I be better off putting the two /usr drives on
> separate controllers?
I'd think it was better to mount them across separate controllers. With
seperate control and data lines, the kernel can issue two simultaneous
requests and get data from both at the same time. My understanding with
IDE (and EIDE) is that a single controller can only access a single
drive at a time and must wait for that request to finish before issuing
another.
SCSI is a more sophisticated in that it allows a request to be issued
and then the bus to idle (for more requests or other data) until the
drive finishes processing the request and can blast back the data.
This is why SCSI is much better than EIDE when dealing with more than one
drive. (At least, this is my understanding... Somebody please correct
me if I'm wrong.)
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debian GNU/Linux! Search it at http://insite.verisim.com/search/debian/simple
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
