PLUG-discuss digest, Vol 1 #3175 - 12 msgs

[George Gambill]

Yo Alan and BoBB

Alan,

You are exactally right.  This is how the drives are configured.


BoBB,

Very good point.  I will move the CD to the IDE2 cable and move the second
HD to the IED1 cable as a slave thereby making it hdb.

One further thought.  I know that performance can be drastically reduced by
head contention even with a 9ms average access.  Years ago, I could drag an
IBM 370  mainframe to its knees by placing related files on the same volume
(disk drive).  Could there be something called channel contention?  Would
there be any justifiable advantage to replacing the CD ROM with a SCSI type
and leaving the second HD on IDE2 as hdc.

ALAN wrote:

>Congrats!  This is an example of how valuable PLUG is to us members.
>
>By way of information:  From what you said, I think I can guess how you
have
>the new drive connected to your computer.
>
>The IDE devices are "lettered" according to where they are attached.  Your
>comment about needing to specify hdc and the hdb confusion indicates this
>layout:
>
>Original drive = Master, IDE bus 1 = hda
>CDROM drive    = Slave,  IDE bus 1 = hdb
>New drive      = Master, IDE bus 2 = hdc
>Nothing yet    = Slave,  IDE bus 2 = hdd
>
>Even if you had nothing attached as the slave on IDE bus 1 and you attached
>your new drive as the master on bus 2, the new drive would still be hdc.
>


BoBB wrote:

>If that is in fact the case i would recomend you take the cdrom off the
>ide channel with the hard drive on it. The cdrom will slow down the
>speed on that channel causing you to get poor performance from your hard
>drive. Ideally both the hard drives would be on the first channel and
>your cdrom on the second channel.