Matt Liotta wrote: > Oops! Let me try again. > > >>SCSI supports concurrent requests better than IDE does. >> > > This is a myth.
That is not entirely true. The caching strategy used in (extremely fast (eg 10k+)) SCSI harddrives is better for Random Access than for Continues Access. That's one plus for SCSI. That's also why in server work there is no IDE drive that's faster than a SCSi drive. There is however one IDE drive that's faster in Desktop work than most SCSI drives (the new maxtor 120Gb drive with 8Mb cache), Also SCSI devices can communicate at the same time with the controller, and can even communicate with eachother without interference of a controller. This makes them better for concurrent requests. Also SCSI can support more than 2 devices per channel, so you can have more disks in your system, (and dat tape stations and cd-roms and so on...). Also the cache size on SCSI disks is usually larger (eg 8Mb or even 16 Mb instead of 2 or 4 Mb) which makes them also better in handling concurrent requests, as this speeds up Random access. If you want to know more, go to www.storagereview.com and have a look around. Jesse ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
