hard disks for 3b1
John McMillan
jcm at mtunb.ATT.COM
Thu Nov 23 03:48:53 AEST 1989
By now Bruce has probably had some sleep and begun to regret
his posting:
In article <1145 at becker.UUCP> bdb at becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) writes:
:
> In general, any drive which works with a
> standard IBM XT or AT controller with a
> ST-506 interface ought to work fine. You
> can't reference more than 1024 tracks without
> the P5.1 upgrade, and you can't reference
> more than 8 heads without the WD2010. The
- P5.1 supports 9 -> 16 heads
- WD2010 supports 1025 -> 2047 heads
- Note that early kernels (3.0? 3.5?) may not support
> 1024 cylinders.
> chip doesn't require the upgrade, & the upgrade
> doesn't require the chip. It is possible to use
> RLL drives but you will only get 2/3 of the
> rated capacity, since the tracks will be
> formatted with only 17 512-byte sectors.
- _I_ wouldn't use RLL, but lack details. It is my
recollection that the electronics just ain't
THE SAME and at least boundary-condition
problems might occur. (Go ask someone who KNOWS
-- NOT ME.)
> It would be useful for people to post any
> known exceptions to this generality.
- The WD chip registers are set for write-pre-compensation
at cylinder 128. How sensitive your disk is to
this ain't my concern!-)
Geee... I think this posts exceptions to all-but-one statement, Bruce!-)
john mcmillan -- att!mtunb!jcm -- speaking for self, not THEM
(And rushing off for lamb vindaloo without reviewing
the nonsense I've posted above.)
More information about the Unix-pc.general
mailing list