RLL controllers & 386/ix

[Karl Denninger]

>Item 189 (0 resps) by ilan343 at violet.berkeley.edu on Tue 29 Aug 89 15:40
>[<No Identification>]    Subject: RLL controllers & 386/ix (8 lines)
>
>I am setting up a 386 clone that will eventually run a version of UNIX,
>probably 386/ix. Since I am trying to keep costs down, I am thinking of
>using a large (120MB) RLL hard-drive.  I see from Interactive's list of
>compatible hardware that they limit the choices of RLL controllers,
>which concerns me a bit.
>
>Can anyone report their experience (good or bad) trying to install
>versions UNIX/386 in systems with RLL controllers?

WD1006-V/SR2:

Nice and FAST.  Gawd, is it FAST.  Has a track cache on-board, and uses it
well.  Will run 1:1 interleave, and is quite respectable, even when compared
with SCSI or ESDI drive/controller combinations!   Highly recommended as the
controller to use.

If you're running 386/ix, make DARN SURE it is 2.0.2.  2.0.1 and before had
serious problems with either this board or RLL in general, we never 
determined which.  Interactive was unresponsive, to put it nicely (this
isn't alt.flame, so I won't post the entire text of what I think of their
support abilities :-).

But they did (silently) fix the problem in 2.0.2, or at least it appears so.
SCO Xenix works with this board without hassles.  Plug and play, you're up
and running, no problems noted in about 9 months of use.

If you need a source we stock 'em, and at a good price.  Features include a 
track cache, on-board floppy control (can't disable it tho -- but we have 
a version sans floppy if you have one on the motherboard), and on-board 
BIOS for formatting and the like.  If you're going to use it with a drive 
with > 1024 cylinders then 386/ix is DEFINATELY not what you want to use;
they require a ROM entry for the drive type, and while the BIOS on this
board can "spoof" the entry (and 386/ix deals with that) it can't set an
entry that the bios won't support -- and BIOS entries are limited to 1024
cyls!

SCO, again, deals with the board without trouble, even for drives with > 1024
cylinders.  With SCO you can disable the onboard BIOS and still get full
speed and use of the drive.  386/ix requires the BIOS enabled, thus the 1024
cylinder limitation.

WD is working on this limitation, or so they say.


Adaptec ACB2372:
 STAY AWAY.  We have had a number of problems with these monsters.
 Problems include "losing" the configuration of drives, etc.  This is
 not nice - if you lose the configuration in the controller (which
 apparently is stored on the drive) you all of a sudden don't have
 any data on the disk, and can't recover without a low-level format!

 They are also not caching boards, which is a bummer speed-wise.  You
 simply can't get full performance out of these cards.


DPT:
 Very fast, 512K - 16MB cache on-board.  VERY EXPENSIVE as well.
 Base prices are around $1k, going up from there.  Ouch.  Great if
 you need it, but for that kind of money.....


Disclaimer:  We will sell any or all of the above, our opinions are biased 
	     based on what works and what doesn't :-)
	     
--
Karl Denninger (karl at ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Public Access Data Line: [+1 312 566-8911], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910]
Macro Computer Solutions, Inc.  "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"