Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rpi!image.soe.clarkson.edu!wargopl
From: wargopl@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Peter L. Wargo)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Micropolis HDs & WD1006V-SR2 RLL 1:1 Controllers
Message-ID: <1990May29.212114.23128@sun.soe.clarkson.edu>
Date: 29 May 90 21:21:14 GMT
References: <37@raysnec.UUCP>
Sender: wargopl@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Peter L. Wargo)
Distribution: na
Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY
Lines: 26

From article <37@raysnec.UUCP>, by shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake):
> In article <60997@sgi.sgi.com> fanj@remb6489.wpd.sgi.com (Fan Jiao) writes:
>>I ran SI on C:, and the index is 3.6, compared with 2.7 in MFM 3:1 case.
>>I also did CORETEST.  The transfer rate now is 672 KB/sec, while it was
>>162 before.
> 
> With the exception of the seek time figures, I don't lend much credence
> to CORETEST results. The throughput analysis appears to use large block
> data streams (usually 32K or 64K) whereas most applications and operating
> systems use .5K - 2K transfers. The presence of software disk cache will
> also skew results so much they become meaningless. With version 2.8 they
> at least recognize the use of cache, but results are still worthless.

Coretest will allow you to change the block size... you can go from 1k
to 64k in 1k inc.
(In my version)

type "coretest ?"

Pete

-- 
Peter L. Wargo - wargopl@sun.soe.clarkson.edu, amoung others...
"I don't believe it - I just spent 4 years at an expensive university-
 and I end up as a top-40 DJ..."