Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ginosko!uunet!mcsun!ukc!slxsys!ibmpcug!ronald
From: ronald@ibmpcug.co.uk (Ronald Khoo)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Xenix device drivers under Unix
Message-ID: <56d2.250eedb5@ibmpcug.co.uk>
Date: 14 Sep 89 00:15:49 GMT
References: <4552@cps3xx.UUCP>
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
Lines: 30

In article <4552@cps3xx.UUCP> jhl@frith.egr.msu.edu () writes:
>While I have your ear, does anyone know if SCO UNIX has gotten rid of
>the silly limit of only seeing 1024 cylinders on a disk that SCO XENIX
>had?

Eh?  Xenix didn't have this problem at all, only the documentation
did!  Yes, I *know* that the release notes say only 1024 are supported,
but there doesn't seem to be any problem going above that.  At least,
not if the *controller card* can handle it, but then all WD cards
starting from WD1003 and more modern can.  For standard ST-506
controllers, I can heartily recommend the WD1006.  With 1:1 interleave,
it screams along quite merrily. 

(hey, rosso@sco, why did the release notes say 1024 only ?)

Under SCO Xenix 2.3.1 and later, you can even have 2 controllers,
and this makes things go *really fast*  I am using 2 WD1007A ESDI
controllers, with one disc on each, and am getting terrific I/O
performance from the machine.  And yes, one of the discs has 1224 cylinders
which I had no problem with even when I was using Xenix 2.2.3 last week.

But there's no doubt that adding the second controller is definitely
a worthwhile investment--for an application mix which is mostly
disc bound, meaning anything not development or CAD oriented, really,
it actually effectively doubles the number of users you can support!

-- 
Ronald.Khoo@ibmpcug.CO.UK (The IBM PC User Group, PO Box 360, Harrow HA1 4LQ)
Path: ...!ukc!slxsys!ibmpcug!ronald Phone: +44-1-863 1191 Fax: +44-1-863 6095
$Header: /users/ronald/.signature,v 1.1 89/09/03 23:36:16 ronald Exp $ :-)