Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!crdgw1!rpi!sigma
From: sigma@jec302.its.rpi.edu (Kevin J Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: lowlevel ide drive.
Message-ID: <{-=&&D+@rpi.edu>
Date: 18 Feb 91 05:07:09 GMT
References: <1991Feb17.064952.14315@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Lines: 27
Nntp-Posting-Host: jec302.its.rpi.edu

gwoho@nntp-server.caltech.edu (g liu) writes:
>people say that this should not need to be done and its already 1:1.
>it is not 1:1 on my drive. its 2:1. i would like to know how to adjust it
>so i can make it best for whatever os i use.
>it would be dumb if ide drives are stuck at 1:1 for a lot of people, because
>they run os that can not keep up.

The OS shouldn't make any difference to the interleave, and vice versa.  As
I understand it, the real bottleneck on transferring data from the disk to
the computer is the bus.  The processor itself is usually going to be
faster than any of that already.

>some people have reported destroying their ide drives via llformating.
>apparently their programs were not just pretending to llformat; they must
>really have been doing it. would one of those people email me a copy of
>the program? 

Let me get this straight.  You're ASKING someone to send you a copy of the
program which rendered their IDE drive USELESS, so you can try it too?!  On
the face of it, it sounds insane.

What sort of data transfer rate are you getting?  I mean, as tested by a
program like CheckIt or something.

-- 
Kevin Martin
sigma@rpi.edu