To: pae who wrote (3283 ) 10/29/1998 5:40:00 PM From: Spots Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 14778
config1: ide1 - HD3.2/master, CDROM/slave ide2 - HD7.6/master Config2: ide1 - HD3.2/master ide2 - HD7.6/master, CDROM/slave Config3: ide1 - HD3.2/master, HD7.6/slave ide2 - CDROM/slave As a practical matter, I have not seen any degradation of the master HD when a CD was on the IDE slave position. You would degrade the HD on the same controller as the CD while the CD was busy, but even if you copy from the CD to the HD on the same controller the degradation will probably not be particularly noticeable (any more than having two HDs on the same channel would be, at any rate). Essentially, unless the HD is pretty slow, the CD's speed will be the limiting factor in the transfer. This probably sounds more esoteric than it is. Since IDE controllers are single-threaded, copies from one device to another on the same controller have to wait for each other. Of course, they have to wait anyhow for actual data transfer (got to read it from x before you can write it to y, no matter what). Possibly the newer DMA IDE disks can actually overlap some data transfers; somebody knowledgeable about that might comment. Anyhow, you'll probably see your best overall performance with Config 2. You WILL use both HDs, unless you configure your swap files, program files, and all data on a single disk, which would not be a good plan. I'd suggest swap and data on the CTL 1 master and data on the CTL 2 master, though you might also want swap space there as well. IF you decide on Config 2 and later add another HD, do yourself a favor and move your 7.6 drive from ide2 master to ide1 slave and add your new drive as the ide2 master. That is, unless you REALLY enjoy changing drive letters in all your shortcuts. Also your newest disk will probably be faster and can work to your advantage as the master on ide2. Config 3 is a viable alternate, though you won't get as good a performance from the HDs. Chances are you won't notice the difference, practically speaking. (If you do notice the difference, SCSI would probably really benefit you). You WILL notice the difference in large disk-to-disk transfers, though. Config 2 will be significantly faster than config 3. Probably not a frequent problem. I don't actually know of a real problem with config 1, but it would worry me. But then I'm paranoid (so they say; personally I think someone's out to get me<g>). However, HD performance should be about the same as config 2, assuming my fears are unfounded. Spots