home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!slcs.slb.com!leo.asc.slb.com!sjsca4!poffen
- From: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
- Subject: Re: Interleaving in hard disk
- Message-ID: <1992Nov11.202450.23220@sj.ate.slb.com>
- Date: 11 Nov 92 20:24:50 GMT
- References: <69128@cup.portal.com>
- Sender: news@sj.ate.slb.com
- Distribution: na
- Organization: Schlumberger Technologies, ATE division, San Jose, Ca.
- Lines: 22
- X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
-
- Rick_Michael_Cortese@cup.portal.com wrote:
- : $.02, Double check to see if your BIOS supports automatic interleave. AMI on
- : my clone does. There's also so PD stuff running around BBS's that'll tell you
- : your I/O speed. For instance, I just recently formated an old RLL drive on my
- : back-up computer. Reccommended setting was '5, but '7 produced the best
- : performance (Hey! it's an ancient computer & drive). Went 5 times as fast
- : using 7 vs 6.
-
- This makes sense. The proper interleave for your system depends on your
- controller, and how fast the CPU can read the data. If the interleave is too
- low, then the CPU or controller is not ready to receive the data, and the
- platter must make another full rotation (equivalent to an interleave of 17
- on MFM, higher on RLL) before it can read the next sector of data. The correct
- interleave is where the next nth sector passes under the disk heads at the
- time the controller and CPU is ready to read it. On fast systems with good
- controllers, 1:1 is possible. On most AT class machines (286) 2 or 3:1 is
- typical. On old PC/XT systems, 6 or 7:1 is typical.
-
- Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com
- Schlumberger Technologies ATE UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen
- 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276
- San Jose, Ca. 95110 Voice: (408)437-5254 FAX: (408)437-5246
-