Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:40:51 -0800 | From | Mike Fedyk <> | Subject | Re: libata in 2.4.24? |
| |
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 11:18:24PM +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote: > In article <20031202230216.GB4154@mis-mike-wstn.matchmail.com>, > Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> wrote: > | On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 10:34:20PM +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote: > | > after each O_SYNC write, so that's probably not practical. Clearly the > | > best solution is a full SCSI implementation over PATA/SATA, but that > | > would eliminate some of the justification for SCSI devices at premium > | > prices. > | > | In many ways, that is exactly what SATA is. :) > > Until multiple devices be string are available SATA will have logistical > problems scaling. The small cable is an advantage running a few drives > in a box, but a server with 40 drives or so would go from a cable bundle > out the back, about 5cm by 1 cm, to a real bunch of those little round > cables running everywhere. Certainly doable, but I think I'd name the > server "Medusa" if I built it. >
Isn't this what SSCSI (Serial SCSI) will be doing also -- one drive one cable?
I'd imagine that you'd have one connection to the enclosure, and the entire enclosure will look like a single drive. I've heard of SCSI enclosures like this (even ones that hold ide drives, but talk scsi to the host).
> I believe SATA-2 will address this, if I may believe what's projected > for an unwritten standard.
There will probably be many ways to get around any issues that may come up with SATA until SATA-2 comes out. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |