Re: [TCLUG:12134] SCSI vs. IDE

[Scott <pope@ossuary.net>]

On Tue, 11 Jan 2000, Eric M. Hopper wrote:
 
> 	I'm curious because people often ask me to recommend system
> configurations, and I'm wondering if my opinion of SCSI is outdated.
> I'm also wondering how I should recommend they attach their IDE CD-ROM
> and hard drives.

     Basically when choosing between the two, it still comes
down to the task at hand.  If you have a box that will be
doing a lot of I/O for various things (mail, webserving,
ftp) and all these will reside on one machine for some
reason, scsi is the only way to go.  That's also true if you
need redundancy (though promise apparently makes a
pseudo-raid thing for ide).  If it's a small server where
data loss isn't a concern and it won't be getting severely
crunched, a good ATA/66 ide drive will suffice.  I know
Linux didn't have support for ATA/66 last I heard, but maybe
they've added that in 2.3.x.
     For your standard workstation setup, unless you really
believe you'll need all that I/O throughput, the 7200 rpm
ide drives will do the job.  IBM makes the best, imo.  As
far as setting them up in the box, if your board has two ide
channels, I always put the cdrom on the secondary master and
the first hdd on the primary master.  I doubt it makes any
performance difference, but it does save on having to make
ribbon cables do strange things in order to fit a slave
drive on.
 
Scott
-- 
I love you more than anything in this world.
I don't expect that will last.
 -Elvis Costello