21 Oct
2004
21 Oct
'04
4:02 p.m.
On Thursday 21 October 2004 18:00, linux-audio-user-request(a)music.columbia.edu
wrote:
Why does "everyone" set
things up with HDs on one channel, CDs on the other? I
was told that the slower CD device will slow down the HD. I had run Windoze
with a setup like the above with no problems, however.
/dev/hda � �
system hd
/dev/hdb � � DVD burner
/dev/hdc � � data hd
/dev/hdd � � DVD reader
Does this look OK? (Does it matter where i plug the drives at all?)
I think this setup looks good. Give it a try. 
21 Oct
21 Oct
4:28 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: ide drives
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 19:44:11 +0200, David Baron <d_baron(a)012.net.il> wrote:
On Thursday 21 October 2004 18:00,
linux-audio-user-request(a)music.columbia.edu
wrote:
Why does "everyone" set
things up with HDs on one channel, CDs on the other? I
was told that the slower CD device will slow down the HD. I had run Windoze
with a setup like the above with no problems, however.
I think it depends on the system and the drives. It's a complicated subject.
1) In a 'standard, off the shelf' PC you have a single hard drive and
a single CDRW. In that case you make them both master devices on
separate channels. No conflicts.
2) In my IDE based audio drive system my second drive is on a second
controller so I have 4 channels available. In this case all the drives
are still master devices. (See - not 'everyone sets up the HD on one
channel!) ;-)
In Robert's case he wants to use the two channels available to him. He
knows he's going to use the two drives at the same time, so he's
optimized for that usage.
However, you are correct that if he was to mix an older CDRW/DVD drive
that was (possibly) a UDMA1/2/3 drive, with his nice, new UDMA5/6/7/8
hard drives, then the system might have to slow the EIDE cable down
and his drive would go slower. He'd still be spinning at 10K RPM, but
on the cable he's be going 33MHz instead of 100MHz, etc...
It's a crap shoot answering questions like this without madel numbers
for all the devices, and if he gave me model numbers I'd probbably run
and hide as figuring it out is too much work. ;-)
- Mark
/dev/hda
system hd
/dev/hdb DVD burner
/dev/hdc data hd
/dev/hdd DVD reader
Does this look OK? (Does it matter where i plug the drives at all?)
I think this setup looks good. Give it a try. 
7:47 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: OT: ide drives
First of all, thanks a lot to you, David and anahata for your answers :-)
Mark Knecht <markknecht(a)gmail.com> writes:
> > > /dev/hda system hd
> > > /dev/hdb DVD burner
> > > /dev/hdc data hd
> > > /dev/hdd DVD reader
> > >
> > > Does this look OK? (Does it matter where i plug the drives at all?)
> >
> > I think this setup looks good. Give it a try.
I was very pleased by this simple answer, but...
> Why does "everyone" set things up with
HDs on one channel, CDs on the
> other? I was told that the slower CD device will slow down the HD.
Yes this was one of my concerns (the other one being my impression, that
it might be better to have the two important drives on separate channels)
Could a slower optical drive slow down a faster hd even if it is not in use?
As Mark understood correctly i do *not* use the optical drives while doing
audio work.
I think it depends on the system and the drives.
It's a complicated subject.
That's what i feared ;-(
In Robert's case he wants to use the two channels
available to him. He
knows he's going to use the two drives at the same time, so he's
optimized for that usage.
Exactly! That's what i want.
However, you are correct that if he was to mix an
older CDRW/DVD drive
that was (possibly) a UDMA1/2/3 drive, with his nice, new UDMA5/6/7/8
hard drives, then the system might have to slow the EIDE cable down
and his drive would go slower. He'd still be spinning at 10K RPM, but
on the cable he's be going 33MHz instead of 100MHz, etc...
It's a crap shoot answering questions like this without madel numbers
for all the devices,
Oups, sorry...
dmesg says the old drive is a Samsung SP1604N (hda:DMA UDMA(100))
my LG DVD-burner is a GSA-4040B
Playing around with hdparm -I i get a lot of information (which i do
not really understand), but hd and burner both show the line
PIO: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
the burner reports *udma2 and the hd *udma5 (could this be a problem?)
The new drive is a Samsung SP1614N 7200rpm and the new DVD-ROM is a LG
GDR-8163B.
and if he gave me model numbers I'd probbably run
and hide
as figuring it out is too much work. ;-)
Hmm, so maybe it would be less work to try both setups:
1) both hds as masters, optical drives as slaves.
2) hds on one channel, dvds on the other one.
The problem is that i do not really know how to test performance...
I understand from the discussion so far, that it's not trivial to
predict, if 1) or 2) will be better. Right?
Thanks a lot,
Robert Epprecht
8:18 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: OT: ide drives
El Jue 21 Oct 2004 18:32, Robert Epprecht escribió:
Hmm, so maybe it would be less work to try both
setups:
1) both hds as masters, optical drives as slaves.
2) hds on one channel, dvds on the other one.
The problem is that i do not really know how to test performance...
To test IDE performance use hdparm.
hdparm -tT /dev/hda
It can occasionally cause unexpected data corruption but it's very usefull.
Have a look at:
http://linux.oreillynet.com/lpt/a/linux/2000/06/29/hdparm.html
Martín.
5:01 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: ide drives
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 07:44:11PM +0200, David Baron wrote:
Why does "everyone" set things up with HDs
on one channel, CDs on the other? I
was told that the slower CD device will slow down the HD. I had run Windoze
with a setup like the above with no problems, however.
It used to be true. It was often misrepresented as the CD slowing the HD
down to its speed but I think the real reason had something to do with
spurious interrupts not being handled properly by one driver or the
other. I think now everything is properly EIDE or ATAPI (or what ever
the relevant spec is) compliant, it is no longer a problem.
There is still some sense in putting two HDs on different controllers,
so that drive use can be efficiently overlapped if both drives are
likely to be active at once.
--
Anahata
anahata(a)treewind.co.uk -+- http://www.treewind.co.uk
Home: 01638 720444 Mob: 07976 263827
6:54 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: ide drives
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 19:43:16 +0100, anahata <anahata(a)treewind.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 07:44:11PM +0200, David Baron
wrote:
No - this actually is true. An EIDE controller that is compliant with
the ATAPI specs will recognie that one drive operates with the cable
going 100MHz, while the controller recognizes that the CDROM only
works when the cable goes 33MHz or 66MHz. since the two drives are on
the same cable the EIDE controller sets the cable speed at 33MHz and
therefore you get less throughput from the hard drive. I wasn't aware
until about 2 years ago that the controller had to do this. There are
some good white papers somewhere on the Seagate or Maxtors sites if I
remember correctly.
Why does "everyone" set things up with
HDs on one channel, CDs on the other? I
was told that the slower CD device will slow down the HD. I had run Windoze
with a setup like the above with no problems, however.
It used to be true. It was often misrepresented as the CD slowing the HD
down to its speed
8:01 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: OT: ide drives
Mark Knecht <markknecht(a)gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 19:43:16 +0100, anahata
<anahata(a)treewind.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 07:44:11PM +0200, David Baron wrote:
> > was told that the slower CD device will slow
down the HD.
> It used to be true. It was often misrepresented as
the CD slowing the HD
> down to its speed
No - this actually is true. An EIDE controller that is
compliant with
the ATAPI specs will recognie that one drive operates with the cable
going 100MHz, while the controller recognizes that the CDROM only
works when the cable goes 33MHz or 66MHz. since the two drives are on
the same cable the EIDE controller sets the cable speed at 33MHz and
therefore you get less throughput from the hard drive. I wasn't aware
until about 2 years ago that the controller had to do this. There are
some good white papers somewhere on the Seagate or Maxtors sites if I
remember correctly.
So you say, that it is the *controller* who does it?
It can not be influenced (set) by the kernel, by hdparm or something?
This sounds like it could be easy to figure it out with dmesg, hdparm
or something comparing results with and without connecting the optical
drive? What exactly should i look for?
Robert
8:39 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: OT: ide drives
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:47:11 +0200, Robert Epprecht <epprecht(a)solnet.ch> wrote:
Mark Knecht <markknecht(a)gmail.com> writes:
No - it's done in hardware. If one drive REQUIRES that the cable run
at 33MHz, and the other drive can operate at 33/66100MHz, then the
controller sets the cable at 33MHz and leaves it there. The EIDE cable
cannot change frequency while operating.
I think the good news is that your equipment looks new enough that you
will likely not have this problem. It's more an issue when mixing new
and old hardware.
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 19:43:16 +0100, anahata
<anahata(a)treewind.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 07:44:11PM +0200, David Baron wrote:
> > was told that the slower CD device will
slow down the HD.
> It used to be true. It was often
misrepresented as the CD slowing the HD
> down to its speed
No - this actually is true. An EIDE controller
that is compliant with
the ATAPI specs will recognie that one drive operates with the cable
going 100MHz, while the controller recognizes that the CDROM only
works when the cable goes 33MHz or 66MHz. since the two drives are on
the same cable the EIDE controller sets the cable speed at 33MHz and
therefore you get less throughput from the hard drive. I wasn't aware
until about 2 years ago that the controller had to do this. There are
some good white papers somewhere on the Seagate or Maxtors sites if I
remember correctly.
So you say, that it is the *controller* who does it?
It can not be influenced (set) by the kernel, by hdparm or something?
This sounds like it could be easy to figure it out with dmesg, hdparm
or something comparing results with and without connecting the optical
drive? What exactly should i look for?
Sure - run:
hdparm -tT /dev/hda
with and without the optial drive attached. (Optical should be /dev/hdb)
Do it again with the second drive using
hdparm -tT /dev/hdc
Robert
7:52 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: OT: ide drives
anahata <anahata(a)treewind.co.uk> writes:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 07:44:11PM +0200, David Baron
wrote:
This would be good news.
Why does "everyone" set things up with
HDs on one channel, CDs on the other? I
was told that the slower CD device will slow down the HD.
It used to be true. It was often misrepresented as the CD slowing the HD
down to its speed but I think the real reason had something to do with
spurious interrupts not being handled properly by one driver or the
other. I think now everything is properly EIDE or ATAPI (or what ever
the relevant spec is) compliant, it is no longer a problem. There is still some sense in putting two HDs on
different controllers,
so that drive use can be efficiently overlapped if both drives are
likely to be active at once.
So you'd say putting both hds (as masters) on the 2 ide channels and the
optical drives (which have significantly less importance to me) as the
slaves is the way to go?
Robert Epprecht
7385
days inactive
7385
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
8 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
anahata -
David Baron -
Mark Knecht -
Martin Rocamora -
Robert Epprecht