On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Chris Bitmead wrote:
// It's not a matter of not believing, it's of who to believe. Opinion
// seems divided 50/50.
I'm not sure where you get 50/50. I've not met anyone who
recommended IDE disks over SCSI disks unless the only factor was price,
since IDE disks are generally available for less than SCSI disks. You
will get better performance with SCSI disks. That's just the way it is.
If you can provide any evidence to the contrary, I'll show you a
single-tasking operating system running a single process doing nothing but
sequential disk reads or write, hardly useful to anybody needing to store
or read data.
// > For best results,
// > you can find some disks that are exactly the same internally but only vary
// > with their interfaces.
//
// Have you done such tests? If so, what exactly were the results?
I don't need to. I've used both in real world environments. I
know just enough about the hardware to explain why IDE has always been
slower than SCSI in my environments. I *do* know that I've run out of
disk and have been able to slap an external disk on a running Sun and move
stuff over to it at home, and we've done similar things at work.
--
Principal Member Technical Staff, beyond.com The world is watching America,
pub 1024/3CAE01D5 1994/11/03 Dustin Sallings <dustin@spy.net>
| Key fingerprint = 87 02 57 08 02 D0 DA D6 C8 0F 3E 65 51 98 D8 BE
L______________________________________________ and America is watching TV. __
