Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!purdue!bu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!stanford.edu!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!ryn.mro4.dec.com!databs.enet.dec.com!norcott
From: norcott@databs.enet.dec.com (Bill Norcott)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: RODINE SCSI drives, do they run wit
Message-ID: <4606@ryn.mro4.dec.com>
Date: 29 Apr 91 19:46:21 GMT
Sender: guest@ryn.mro4.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 26


In article <283400099@adaptx1>, neese@adaptx1.UUCP writes...
> 
>Historically, Rodime has not had the most robust implementation of SCSI
>around.  They usually are fine on the bus by themselves, but sometimes have
>been known to cause problems with other devices.  Admittedly, it has been
>a while since I fooled around with Rodime drives, so they could have gotten
>it together in the last couple of years.
> 
>			Roy Neese
>			Adaptec Senior SCSI Applications Engineer
>			UUCP @  neese@adaptex
>				uunet!cs.utexas.edu!utacfd!merch!adaptex!neese
Roy,

I am using the 210 MB Rodime RO3000T with an Adaptec 1542, it works just
fine.  This is their newest model disk.  I have it on there with an 
Archive 2150S and previously also had a Seagate ST296N attached.

With Coretest 2.92 it measures > 800 KB/sec transfer rate, which is faster
than my previous CDC model 94161-155.  The Rodime has a little slower access
time, 18 msec versus 16.5 for the CDC.  But the Rodime *seems* faster, and
runs UNIX benchmarks such as IOstone faster, maybe because of the 4x16K
cache buffer.  

Bill Norcott