Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!mtune!whuts!homxb!mtuxo!mtgzz!rosen
From: rosen@mtgzz.UUCP (t.rosenfeld)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Interleave factor on a 6300
Message-ID: <2957@mtgzz.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 11-Aug-87 13:49:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: mtgzz.2957
Posted: Tue Aug 11 13:49:49 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 14-Aug-87 00:37:13 EDT
References: <2928@mtgzz.UUCP> <1844@ttrdc.UUCP> <300@cpsc6b.cpsc6a.att.com>
Organization: AT&T, Middletown NJ
Lines: 19

In article <300@cpsc6b.cpsc6a.att.com>, crs@cpsc6b.cpsc6a.att.com (C. R. Seaman) writes:
 [ .... ]
 > No.  The interleave values for a hard disk are based on the performance of
 > the disk, not the system.  It basically determines the number of cylinders
 > the head must pass after reading from/writing to a cylinder before it can
 > read from/write to another cylinder.  If the drive takes 4 cylinders to
 > reset, and you set the interleave to 3, the head will wait for almost a
 > complete revolution before attempting another read/write.  Setting the value
 > to 5 would mean that the drive is basically idle for one cylinder pass.
 > 
 > Chris Seaman            |    o\  /o

I take it Chris meant "sectors" not "cylinders".

-- 
Tom Rosenfeld	 	@ AT&T Information Systems Labs, Middletown, NJ
			(201) 957-5867 	
			UUCP:		{harpo,ihnp4,burl,akgua}!mtgzz!rosen
Disclaimer: I don't claim anything.