lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux
Date
From
: Again, I'm not talking about protocols.  I'm addressing the argument that an 
: STP-capable drive is somehow fundamentally different from a SCSI-capable
: one, since that's the argument that keeps being raised against this idea.
: I'm talking about the controller board, not the details of communication.

OK, I think I get it. Your point is that SCSI is similar in complexity
to STP so the fact that SCSI exists says that drives with STP (and
perhaps Linux) are pretty much a done deal. Is that it? If so, excuse
my slow brain, it takes me a while sometimes.

It's a good point, the only flaw is that SCSI drives are way more expensive
than IDE drives. The question is if that is inherent or just mark up...

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.272 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site