*BSD News Article 52459


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!chi-news.cic.net!news.wctc.net!spcuna!ritz!ritz
From: ritz@ritz.mordor.com (Chris Mauritz)
Subject: Re: DNS, FTP & Mail - for ISP
References: <44mmsd$1lda@news.gate.net> <44ro0o$r9l@tzlink.j51.com> <450eem$335@news.hal-pc.org> <450tf7$4n0@tzlink.j51.com> <454bpu$eev@uriah.heep.sax.de> <459tpi$g6v@tzlink.j51.com> <DG6nvu.7pE@ritz.mordor.com> <45cq5p$k16@tzlink.j51.com>
Organization: Mordor International
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 05:58:49 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0]
Message-ID: <DG7xy1.748@ritz.mordor.com>
Lines: 54

Louis Epstein (lepslog@j51.com) wrote:
: Chris Mauritz (ritz@ritz.mordor.com) wrote:
: : Louis Epstein (lepslog@j51.com) wrote:
: : : J Wunsch (j@uriah.heep.sax.de) wrote:
: : : : Louis Epstein <lepslog@j51.com> wrote:
: : : : >OK...where did you find a controller that handles a 9GB disk?The main ones
: : : : >seem to stop at 8...which is why I ditched plans to use a 9 for news.
: : : 
: : : : Why should a SCSI controller stop at 8 GB?
: : : 
: : : : With 32-bit logical block numbers and the common value of 512 bytes
: : : : per block, you can address
: : :  
: : : : [arithmetic snipped] 
: : : 
: : : : 2048 gigabytes.
: : : 
: : : Be that as it may,BusLogic and Adaptec are now making cards that can only
: : : handle 8GB or smaller drives.
: 
: : Um, both the Adaptec 2940 and the Buslogic 946C will handle 9gb drives.
: 
: Just checked the web pages for both...the latter says 8 GB limit,the former
: doesn't say a disk capacity limit,but they said it would take a firmware
: upgrade when I called them(and I'm getting the 445 anyway).

This is only applicable to DOS.  You might be interested in what Paul
Vixie has to say about building BSD/OS pc's.  To wit:

I'll start by recommending against VLB. VLB is the IBM PC of bus 
architectures. It has no parity on any signals, totally slipshod 
timing specifications, and no strong central authority telling 
hardware vendors what ``compliance'' means. Each VLB card is another 
``load'' on the CPU/Memory bus. Since this bus was usually not designed 
to have more than three loads, you are at risk if you put more than 
one VLB card into your system. In fact if you put more than one VLB card
into your system it will automatically slow the CPU/Memory bus down to 
make sure that each electron has a chance to visit all the voters. To 
combat this performance problem, motherboard designers have taken to 
putting a set of hardware buffers between the VLB and the CPU/Memory 
bus. The buffers present only one ``load'' to the CPU/Memory bus and 
therefore don't drag its impedence up and its speed down. But there 
are an awful lot of VLB cards out there that don't expect those buffers 
to be there -- and so when they arbitrate for bus ownership they can end
up thinking they won at the same time some other bus member thinks that 
it won. Bad, rotten design. VLB is good enough for video since data 
errors won't be persistent. Using VLB for networking or storage is like 
wearing a ``kick me'' sign on your backside. 

Heh.

Chris


-- 
Christopher Mauritz         | For info on internet access:
ritz@mordor.com             | finger/mail info@ritz.mordor.com OR
Mordor International        | http://www.mordor.com/
201/212/718 internet access | Modem: (201)433-7343,(212)843-3451