Microvax II

From: ajp166 <ajp166_at_bellatlantic.net>
Date: Sun Oct 15 14:19:48 2000

Ok, lets try this way.

You want to use a disgustingly large drive (Larger than 8GB)
on a Qbus controller.

First problem, do you have a SCSI-(anything) that knows and
can handle drives larger 4 or 8GB regardless of the connector?

Assuming you have that covered, can you back it up in an
average lifetime?

Allison

From: Jerome Fine <jhfine_at_idirect.com>
>
>> >Anyone out there who wants to try? I would be very pleased to
>> >swap some of my time for a couple of SCSI 32 GByte hard drives
>> >to test out the software. The only problem is that the only SCSI
>> >host adapters I have are the 50 pin type (CQD 220/M), so there
>> I've run my PDP11 with SCSI CQD already as it's MSCP, Same
>> for VAX/VMS (it's in my MVII).
>
>Jerome Fine replies:
>
>It seem like we agree. The question I was asking was whether or not
>SCSI-2 drives with the 50 pin interface are made that have a capacity
>of more than 9.2 Gbytes such as the ST410800N - preferably at
>least 16 GBytes are maybe even 32 Gbytes. Since I already know
>about this Seagate drive and I agree that is is reasonable in cost, it
>is the larger drives that I am asking about - sorry if I was not clear
>as to the question.
>
>> It's limited to 4 or 8gb and SCSI-II so forget the reall monster
drives.
>
>Are you sure? Is anyone aware of larger drives that still use the 50
pin
>SCSI-2 interface?
>
>> The idea of such huge drive with RT11 and friends is that is wasted.
>> I use D540s (31mb) and swap them like carts as I have a bunch of em
>> and they are plenty big enough. Drives in the 120-400MB range are
>> plentyful for me, one 200mb drive would take all the binaries and
>> sources I have with room to spare that aren't already on Tims CD.
>> Whats the point?
>
>The point is that maybe you are not the only person who runs with
>drives that are so small. And while I agree with you that probably
>most RT-11 or TSX-PLUS users do not use drives even as large
>as 2 GBytes (I use a 600 MByte drive myself and find that is normally
>more than enough capacity), there may be a few who could benefit
>from even larger drives. The problem with the standard MSCP
>DU(X).SYS device driver in RT-11 is that the software limits the user
>to easily using drives that are smaller than 8 GBytes. While I know
>that you are aware of the limitation, the actual question I asked is
>if MSCP allows the hardware use of drives up to a 32 bit block
>number? Again, I obviously did not make my question clear
>enough since you did not answer it. Namely, if the DU(X).SYS
>device driver in RT-11 could handle sending more than a 24 bit
>block number to the hard disk drive via the use of SET commands
>(which would allow a partition number with more than 8 bits), could
>the hardware handle that?
>
>I did not say that everyone would want to make use of that feature
>if it were possible - I know that you will not and I will not. I was
>just asking if it were possible and maybe someone might want
>to do so?
>
>I guess that the point I am trying to make is that I enjoy a software
>challenge whereas you enjoy a hardware challenge. I look a
>some hardware and see what is. You look at the same hardware
>and see what could be. I guess that I do the same with software.
>Then I also go ahead and try make it work. Many times, I actually
>can enhance or fix software just as you make changes to the hardware.
>Can we agree on that?
>
>Sincerely yours,
>
>Jerome Fine
>
Received on Sun Oct 15 2000 - 14:19:48 BST