Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!main.Germany.EU.net!fu-berlin.de!irz401!orion.sax.de!uriah.heep!news From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Recommend a SCSI controller? Date: 22 Jul 1996 06:52:55 GMT Organization: Private BSD site, Dresden Lines: 26 Message-ID: <4sv8g7$3uo@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960721100733.21155B-100000@manhattan.mdl.sandia.gov> <4su9fo$1m8@uriah.heep.sax.de> <vwd91pb2ti.fsf@rylla.sr.hp.com> Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.heep.sax.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.6 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Darryl Okahata <darrylo@sr.hp.com> wrote: > If the performance is similar, is there any real reason for getting > a 2940 (assuming only one SCSI adapter)? Both the Symbios and 2940 > drivers seem to support tagged queueing. The FreeBSD drivers for both seem to be really good. The only annoyance i've seen with the Symbios (well, let's call them `ncr' since we likely won't rename the driver :) is that the BIOS is much poorer. For example, i've got an MO drive in the chain, and it takes a minute or so to continue with booting if there's no medium in the drive. The Adaptec BIOS is much more advanced, among other nifty things (that are not that interesting for us who we don't use the BIOS very much), you can mask out certain targets from the BIOS consider- ation. That's what i would do with the MO on an Adaptec. Apart from this, no, there's certainly no reason as long as you've got a BIOS to boot with. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)