nix@tolsun.oulu.fi (Tero Manninen) (12/25/88)
I am a happy owner of Supra 30M Hard Disk but the software that came with the drive is version 4.3. So, what are the differences with 4.3 and 5.1 software ?? I have read something about random Gurus with fastmem and 4.3 software. Since I am planning to add extra 512k to my A500 it would be nice to know about possible problems now. BTW, is 5.1 soft faster than 4.3 with A500 (no dma transfers ?) ? - - - - - - - - - MERRY XMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL USENETTERS - - Tero Manninen, nix@tolsun.oulu.fi ..enea!kth!draken!tut!tolsun!nix - - - - - - - - -
hrlaser@pnet02.cts.com (Harv Laser) (12/26/88)
nix@tolsun.oulu.fi (Tero Manninen) writes: >I am a happy owner of Supra 30M Hard Disk but the software >that came with the drive is version 4.3. So, what are the >differences with 4.3 and 5.1 software ?? >I have read something about random Gurus with fastmem and >4.3 software. Since I am planning to add extra 512k to my >A500 it would be nice to know about possible problems now. > >BTW, is 5.1 soft faster than 4.3 with A500 (no dma transfers ?) ? YES, you want and need the 5.1 software. In fact 5.3 is now available. It adds a revised scsidisk.device and harddisk.device so that when you have ZERO'd your drive and switched over to FastFileSystem and use the new SUPRAMOUNT -S flat (to use the scsidisk.device) you will find your cheeks aching from the prolonged wide grin when you see how much faster your drive is. This certainly isn't any kind of scientific test but running with Supra 5.3 stuff doing Supramount -s on my 20 meg Supra connected to my ancient A1000, I can load Deluxe Paint II to its initial "what kinda screen you want" requester in -3- seconds flat. (That's timed with the old reliable "one elephant two elephant..." method :-) If you're not joined to one of the information networks on which the new Supra 5.3 stuff is available, just phone Supra and ask for it on disk. There might be a nominal charge. Believe me, it's worth it. Harv Laser, Sysop, The People/Link AmigaZone. Plink: CBM*HARV UUCP: {ames!elroy, <backbone>}!gryphon!pnet02!hrlaser INET: hrlaser@pnet02.cts.com <---open Push down while turning close tightly--->
cs161agc@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (John Schultz) (12/27/88)
I recently reformatted to 5.1 using the scsidisk.device, supramount -s option; only one leetle drawback- it sucks up about 250K for buffers. I called Supra about that (and the fact that you aren't allowed to use the standard mount command), and they stated a new version would be out "next month". Is 5.3 that "new version"? Does it still leave around a "Supramount" task (use Status to check it out)? Does it still eat memory like there's no tomorrow? Can you mount your drive with Mount? Merry New Year, John Schultz
billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) (01/01/89)
From article <446@tolsun.oulu.fi:, by nix@tolsun.oulu.fi (Tero Manninen):
: I am a happy owner of Supra 30M Hard Disk but the software
: that came with the drive is version 4.3. So, what are the
: differences with 4.3 and 5.1 software ??
The major differences between the two versions is the support of
the standard format for partition info on the drive and a faster read on
non-dma transfers for some SCSI controllers. There are also more different
drive manuafcturers supported. The new partition information format helps
mostly with autoboot, but does allow more flexability in setting parameters
for your drive.
: I have read something about random Gurus with fastmem and
: 4.3 software. Since I am planning to add extra 512k to my
: A500 it would be nice to know about possible problems now.
I haven't had any problems with random GURUs with fastmem with either
the 4.3 software or the new stuff...
: BTW, is 5.1 soft faster than 4.3 with A500 (no dma transfers ?) ?
It can be... Try adding a -s to your SupraMount with 5.0 or later,
that turns off the check for byte ready whicvh speeds up reads by quite a
bit. Note that this causes a hung drive with the system locked if your drive/
controller combination does *always* have the byte ready for transfer when
you want it. I've had some problems using the -s on Adaptec 4070s, but none on
Adaptec 4000s, OMTI 352(0|7), Seagate embedded SCSI drive or Miniscribe
embedded SCSIs...
: - - - - - - - - -
: MERRY XMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR
: TO ALL USENETTERS
: - -
: Tero Manninen,
: nix@tolsun.oulu.fi
: ..enea!kth!draken!tut!tolsun!nix
: - - - - - - - - -
--
-Bill Seymour ...tektronix!reed!percival!agora!billsey
...tektronix!sequent!blowpig!billsey
Creative Microsystems Northwest Amiga Group At Home Sometimes
(503) 684-9300 (503) 656-7393 BBS (503) 640-0842billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) (01/01/89)
From article <35@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU:, by cs161agc@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (John Schultz):
: I recently reformatted to 5.1 using the scsidisk.device, supramount -s
: option; only one leetle drawback- it sucks up about 250K for
: buffers. I called Supra about that (and the fact that you aren't
: allowed to use the standard mount command), and they stated a new
: version would be out "next month". Is 5.3 that "new version"? Does
: it still leave around a "Supramount" task (use Status to check it
: out)? Does it still eat memory like there's no tomorrow? Can you
: mount your drive with Mount?
You must be using a 2000 if you can't use the Mount command to
manually mount your partitions. I have no troubles mounting any or all
may partitions with the 1000. You will have to go into SupraFormat and
change your drive to have no partitions at all if you ever want to run
the SupraMount command. The memory being used that you are complaining
about is real simple to get rid of... Use the old file system. The buffers
are quite a bit larger with FFS, and that's what eats the memory. It's
supposedly a feature of FFS, *Not* SupraMount.
If you have a 2000, you'll still need to run SupraMount to get
the DMA stuff initialised, then you should be able to manually mount a
partition and access it. I use this to hack my drive parameters in the
partition blocks at the start of the drive.
: Merry New Year,
:
:
: John Schultz
--
-Bill Seymour ...tektronix!reed!percival!agora!billsey
...tektronix!sequent!blowpig!billsey
Creative Microsystems Northwest Amiga Group At Home Sometimes
(503) 684-9300 (503) 656-7393 BBS (503) 640-0842andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) (01/04/89)
In article <1306@agora.UUCP> billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) writes: >the SupraMount command. The memory being used that you are complaining >about is real simple to get rid of... Use the old file system. The buffers >are quite a bit larger with FFS, and that's what eats the memory. It's >supposedly a feature of FFS, *Not* SupraMount. Not true. The size of buffers is the same under the fast file system as the old file system. The number of buffers can be set (via MountList) for both the FFS and OFS. The only difference is that under the fast file system, adding buffers actually does some good. -- andy finkel {uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy Commodore-Amiga, Inc. "Possibly this is a new usage of the word 'compatible' with which I was previously unfamiliar" Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.
cs161agc@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (John Schultz) (01/05/89)
In article <1306@agora.UUCP> billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) writes: >From article <35@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU:, by cs161agc@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (John Schultz): [stuff I wrote deleted] > You must be using a 2000 if you can't use the Mount command to I'm using a 1000, both of the 2000's I use have 2090As & ST251-1s. I have successfully used Mount on the 1000, even though Supra said it couldn't be done. I saved about 100k, but when testing an alpha program for a friend, my drive got a "Key already set error", which I never got before. I don't know if the program trashed the drive, or if it got trashed because I used the Mount method instead of Supramount[the program was _reading_ from the drive, not writing]. > ... You will have to go into SupraFormat and >change your drive to have no partitions at all if you ever want to run Why? I can mount with Mount or Supramount interchangeably. The partition information for Supramount gets written to the hard disk [first couple of tracks], Mount never sees it, as it gets partition info from mountlist. > -Bill Seymour ...tektronix!reed!percival!agora!billsey So, you've never had any problems using Mount eh? Maybe I'll try it again. Reboot times are quite a bit faster using mount...Are you using the scsidisk.device in your mountlist? John Schultz
billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) (01/07/89)
From article <42@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU:, by cs161agc@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (John Schultz):
:
: I'm using a 1000, both of the 2000's I use have 2090As & ST251-1s.
: I have successfully used Mount on the 1000, even though Supra said
: it couldn't be done. I saved about 100k, but when testing an alpha
: program for a friend, my drive got a "Key already set error", which
: I never got before. I don't know if the program trashed the drive,
: or if it got trashed because I used the Mount method instead of
: Supramount[the program was _reading_ from the drive, not writing].
I usually get the 'Key already set error' when I've written to
the drive with my 2000, then written to it with the 1000 and haven't done
a diskchange between times. I end up going in with Sectorama and manually
fix it, but that can be a pain sometimes. There is no reason you can't
use the Mount command on a Supra interface, SupraMount just makes it a
bit easier.
: Why? I can mount with Mount or Supramount interchangeably. The
: partition information for Supramount gets written to the hard disk
: [first couple of tracks], Mount never sees it, as it gets partition
: info from mountlist.
I haven't tried it on the 1000, but on the 2000 if I try that I
get the partition mounted twice. What I was trying to say was that you
wouldn't be able to use both SupraMount and Mount in the same session.
for the DMA interface, SupraMount pretty much has to be run first before
Mounting a partition manually.
: So, you've never had any problems using Mount eh? Maybe I'll try
: it again. Reboot times are quite a bit faster using
: mount...Are you using the scsidisk.device in your mountlist?
On my system here at home I use the scsidisk.device. It's quite
a bit faster. My drive is formatted with a 1:1 interleave so I can get
maximum speed out of my 2000 and with the old harddisk.device the 1000
was *real slow* (diskperfs of around 60K/sec...) Now with the scsidisk
I get much faster access on the 1000, with no loss on the 2000. On my
system at work, I can't use the scsidisk.device. I have a Rodime and
an Adaptec 4070 and at least one of them doesn't *always* have the byte
ready when I need it... I'm hoping one of the things Supra adds when
they do their new software is the ability to choose a different device
driver for different physical drives.
:
: John Schultz
--
-Bill Seymour ...tektronix!reed!percival!agora!billsey
...tektronix!sequent!blowpig!billsey
Creative Microsystems Northwest Amiga Group At Home Sometimes
(503) 684-9300 (503) 656-7393 BBS (503) 640-0842lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (01/09/89)
In <1323@agora.UUCP>, billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) writes: > I usually get the 'Key already set error' when I've written to >the drive with my 2000, then written to it with the 1000 and haven't done >a diskchange between times. I end up going in with Sectorama and manually >fix it, but that can be a pain sometimes. There is no reason you can't >use the Mount command on a Supra interface, SupraMount just makes it a >bit easier. Your message seems to be saying that you are accessing a single drive with two Amigas. Ifthis is true, and you do a write without a DiskChange, and you then end up with a 'Key alreay set' error, you have almost certainly trashed something on the disk with the latest write. The problem is that of one machine using an outdated bitmap, and writing to where it thinks it can do so safely. Unfortunately, if another write has taken place without the knowledge of the other machine's filing system, the bitmap will not reflect the new bitmap, and something will be trashed, resulting in the 'Key already set' error. 'Fixing it up manually' with Sectorama will fix the bitmap, but what of the data? -larry -- Frisbeetarianism: The belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca or uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
brianm@sco.COM (Brian Moffet) (01/10/89)
In article <1323@agora.UUCP> billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) writes: >From article <42@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU:, by cs161agc@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (John Schultz): > >: Why? I can mount with Mount or Supramount interchangeably. The >: partition information for Supramount gets written to the hard disk >: [first couple of tracks], Mount never sees it, as it gets partition >: info from mountlist. > > I haven't tried it on the 1000, but on the 2000 if I try that I >get the partition mounted twice. What I was trying to say was that you >wouldn't be able to use both SupraMount and Mount in the same session. I have found that on my ami 1000, I cannot use the Mount command without the possability of having the system hang at some point in time. The situation I use to duplicate this (and I have talked to Supra) is to have 2 partitions. On the first partition have about 5 Meg of files etc (WB Extras, Lattice Compiler, UUCP) and then do the follwing command: copy dh0: dh1: all I have never had this succeed all the way through yet. It hangs after about 2/3 of the files have been transfered. This machine has the following for those who are interested: Ami 1000 Supra 30 Meg 4x4 Microbotics Starboard 2 (512K RAM for total of 1 Meg) Not much I kow :-) The problem goes away when I use SupraMount. I am using Fast-FileSystem and the scsidisk.device (quick :-) The normal filesystem and harddisk.device show the same problem. The Pals on my machine have been grounded. If I had lots more memory, this might not be a problem, as I wouldn't go to the hard disk so often (compiles etc..) to create the circumstances necessary. Just FYI. I like the Supra Drive, I just think they have a timing problem or resource allocation problem going on that SupraMount somehow fixes. brian moffet -- Brian Moffet {uunet,decvax!microsoft,ucscc}!sco!brianm -or- ...sco!alar!brian "I was everything you wanted me to be. You were afraid, I was frightening." My fish and company have policies. I have opinions.