Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!bingvaxu!sunybcs!rutgers!njin!princeton!phoenix!caromero
From: caromero@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (C. Antonio Romero)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: ARLL (was Re: Info on HD-Controller PS-180 ?)
Message-ID: <8380@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 11 May 89 19:13:15 GMT
References: <1349@laura.UUCP> <5112@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Reply-To: caromero@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (C. Antonio Romero)
Organization: Princeton University, NJ
Lines: 13

In article <5112@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM> keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson) writes:
>I evaluated the Perstore "ARLL" (Advanced RLL) controller and
>decided against it in favor of (an Adaptec) standard RLL that can
>achieve a 1:1 interleave and hence higher transfer rate to/from the
>disk.  

It looks (from what little I've seen about ARLL) as if it squeezes
substantially more onto each disk than RLL does... does a drive have to
be specially certified to take advantage of this reliably, or can one
get away with an RLL-certified drive? Also, who if anyone sells drives
that are reliable with ARLL controllers?

-Antonio Romero          romero@confidence.princeton.edu