Re: Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- From: "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 05:22:04 +1100
Jonny <spamyourself@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
If you're not seeking approval, why the big long explanation.
He got his nose out of joint when it was pointed out
that some of what he suggested in another post
couldnt produce the symptoms the OP is seeing.
Just leave it alone is usually best choice,
No it isnt. You wont learn a damned thing that way.
In this case what reflections on cables are all about.
especially when phishing is suspected.
Only by those who jump at boogeymen.
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
Rus <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
If this has been covered before, I'm sorry.
You've added some worthwhile observations anyway.
Well. I said I'm sorry only to be polite not because I'm looking
for your approval. Truth of the matter is that people pop in and
out of these newsgroups and most don't follow the entire history of
postings from day one. Many come looking for help and they go once
they've solved a problem. I'm just trying to help those who are
trying to solve a problem. I figure UseNet has a purpose and every
problem shouldn't be solved in a Google search. UseNet allows humans
to interact to a greater degree.
I scanned all the current posts and saw nothing related to this
thread, so, I posted for the benefit of those who would approach
this NG looking for help on the same topic. It's only valuable to
those individuals until the thread is dumped from the server unless
they look in the Google archives and such. I figure if I can help
one person, I've done something worthwhile.
To those who moderate this newsgroup or participate regularly over a
long period of time, I say "I'm sorry" because I can understand that
from their perspective, repeated approaches to the same topics can
become tiresome.
Actually, I'm not sorry. I post with pride because I know that
somewhere, someday, someone might benefit from the things I have
learned the hard way.
Its more likely to be the electrical discontinuity causing
reflections off that bit of the total connection between
drive and motherboard controller.
Wow. Electronics has been a hobby of mine for over 20 years and I
have discussed theory with technicians and engineers alike. I've
got to say, however, I can't make any sense out that statement.
I think it makes more sense to use SATA drives in SATA format
removeable drive bays now, those dont flout the ATA standard.
That format supports hot swap too.
My IDE drives just won't quit. I've got SATA ports on the MB but
there's no reason for me to upgrade just to be able to say that I've
got SATA drives in my computer.
A lot of people (probably you included) jump to SATA drives and
don't even know why. They just do it so they can say "I've got
SATA."
In a practical sense, there's not much to gain. Current hard drives
can't yet saturate an IDE channel with sustained reads or writes so
there's no need for me to upgrade.
The only "speed" benefit of a SATA is just a brief fraction of a
second when data is "burst" to and from the memory chip in the hard
drive. Once that chip is saturated, everything slows down to the
speed at which data can be electromechanically transferred through
the heads to and from the spinning platters. Until hard drives are
packed densly enough and spin fast enough to provide a sustained
read/write speed in excess of 100MB/sec or 133 MB/sec, there's not
much to be gained with a SATA channel.
IDE is 100 (or 133). SATA is 150. For the brief fraction of a
second in time that I'd gain even for a burst write, it's not worth
it to me to go to SATA right now.
I still boot to DOS, W98SE, Win2K, various Linux distributions, as
well as WinXP. Only XP and some Linux kernels are fully satisfied
with a combination of SATA and IDE hard drives connected at the same
time. I also boot from a secondary hard drive sometimes. All these
things make a SATA + IDE combination difficult to manage, I think.
I know that for what little gain there is, it's not worth scrapping
all 6 of my IDE drives for SATA just to say I've got SATA. If I try
to combine SATA HD's and IDE HD's on the same MB, I'm going to add
problems with some of the other OS's in which I play and experiment.
It's not worth those problems just to gain 150 - 100 = 50MB/sec for
a fraction of a second.
Now if I was building a killer gaming machine or if I was building a
server that would manage lots *.gif, *.jpg, *.js, *.txt files and
other tiny files, I think SATA drives would be beneficial to some
small degree.
Since my main computer usage involves video editing where I transfer
mostly huge files over long-term sustained reads and writes? SATA
offers very little benefit for me.
//rus//
.
- References:
- Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- From: Rus
- Re: Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- From: Rod Speed
- Re: Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- From: Rus
- Re: Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- From: Jonny
- Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- Prev by Date: Re: Boot.ini question
- Next by Date: Re: Boot.ini question
- Previous by thread: Re: Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- Next by thread: Re: Removable drive bays-->Corruption
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
