Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!eecae!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!silver
From: silver@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Andy Silverman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Perstore and Maxtor
Keywords: controllers
Message-ID: <7981@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 14 Feb 89 19:14:59 GMT
References: <16761@srcsip.UUCP>
Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
Reply-To: silver@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Andy Silverman)
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 22

In article <16761@srcsip.UUCP> rogers@orion.UUCP (Brynn Rogers) writes:
>Has anybody had any experience with perstore controllers and Maxtor drives??
>I have a Maxtor xt-1140 120 Meg drive (MFM) and from what I hear I could
>get as much as 200 Meg out of it.  
>
>What is the interleave of a perstore controller (1:1, I guess)?
>
>All Maxtor drives use plated media; I understand plated media is a requirement
>for RLL drives.  (please tell me if I am mistaken)
Well, controllers don't have interleave factors, drives do.  You set the
interleave factor during the low-level format of the drive, depending on
things like the clock speed of your computer.  If the interleave is too low
(say 1:1 on an XT) the drive will try to send info faster than the computer
can handle it and drive access slows incredibly as a result.  The trick is 
trying to optimize interleave to get the highest throughput rate.
Also, I don't think plated media is required for an RLL drive, it's just that
plated media are more durable and immune to head crashes than standard oxide
coatings.  RLL drives do require slightly more stringent timing and such in
the analog control card in the drive, however.
Andy Silverman
Internet: silver@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
CompuServe: 72261,531