On Sunday, 9 December 2001 at 22:52:58 +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > On 09-Dec-2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> (The other day a coworker of mine wanted to use DD for some IBM DTLA >> disks, because he'd heard that the disks performed better that way - >> something to do with scatter-gather not working right unless you used >> DD. I'm highly skeptical about this since I have my own measurements >> from IBM DTLA disks partitioned the normal way, ie. NOT DD, and they >> show the disks performing extremely well. Anybody else want to comment >> on this?) > > Sounds like an Old Wives Tale to me. > > I don't understand the need some people have for using something that is > labelled as DANGEROUS.
I don't understand the need some people have for labelling something as DANGEROUS when it works nearly all the time. We don't have many disks which are shared between different platforms, but that will change. As you know, I have the ability to hot swap disks between an RS/6000 platform and an ia32 platform. The RS/6000 disks will never have a Microsoft partition table on them. They will have BSD partition tables on them. Why call this dangerous? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message