Jean-David Beyer wrote:
>
> Ken Lowther wrote:
>
> > Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> >
>
> I am quite sure the reason this goes faster in Windows than in Linux is because the
> Windows software hijacks the Windows process scheduler and does not run other tasks
> very well while the dinky-tape is in use. Writers of the driver for Linux refused
> to violate the integrity of the Linux process scheduler to achieve higher tape
> performance. That is why you can achieve the higher speeds in Windows, and why I
> conjecture that the dinky-tape rate is more sensitive to CPU power/CPU load with
> Linux than it is in Windows.
Since I wasn't running any other programs, I kind of doubted this. But
when I plugged the unit into my dual 466 Mhz pentium system, the drive
worked "right out of the box".
I can't get ftape to load as a module in either system for some reason.
I have to compile it into the kernel to get it to recognize the drive at
all. It was a pain changing the data transfer rate by compiling a
kernel on the p90. Tried 1000 first. Documentation said ftape might
have multiple tries before it decided it couldn't use the faster rate,
and then would kick down on it's own. After 10 minutes of "shining" the
backup just stops and nothing happens. Haven't tried kicking it down to
500 yet. I put it in the other box to see how it would work there
first. My problem is that I only have two isa slots on this board and
they are both occupied. I was hoping to be able to get SOME use out of
the 90.
Decisions, decisions. I hate to retire any hardware.
--
Ken Lowther
Youngstown, Ohio
http://www.atmsite.org
ATM FAQ and more
Good starting place for amateur telescope makers
