*BSD News Article 80148


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!howland.erols.net!news.mathworks.com!newscaster-1.mcast.net!cs.tu-berlin.de!unlisys!desert!mscu.snafu.de!usenet
From: matthias@mscu.snafu.de (Matthias Schuendehuette)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: SCSI tape block size
Date: 6 Oct 1996 09:31:04 GMT
Organization: private UUCP-site running FreeBSD 2.1.5.R
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <537u8o$b8@mscu.snafu.de>
References: <8720ffxq0j.fsf@plm.xs4all.nl> <536grc$ba@uriah.heep.sax.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.snafu.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.7

In article <536grc$ba@uriah.heep.sax.de>,
	j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) writes:
[...]
> 
> (Note that 64 KB is the largest blocksize currently supported inside
> the kernel by physio(), so there's no use in making the parameter
> above larger.)
 
There was a rather large thread in de.comp.os.unix on reading
tar-archives from SGI machines which have default blocksizes of 256 KB.

Not to acknowledge this nonstandard behaviour of IRIX but would it be a
great effort to extend the max. blocksize in physio() and what would be
the drawbacks of doing so?

Ciao/BSD - Matthias

--
*****************************************************************************
Matthias Schündehütte        E-Mail: matthias@mscu.snafu.de
Solmsstrasse 44              Phone : +49-30-69409824 (MET!)
D-10961 Berlin
Germany
*****************************************************************************