[comp.unix.wizards] CD-ROM speed

david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter) (01/10/88)

In article <1972@ncr-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> greg@ncr-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Greg Noel) writes:
>In article <17309@topaz.rutgers.edu> ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) writes:
>>CD ROM roots would be bad because CD ROM's are blindingly slow.
>
>Currently true.  But don't take the current state-of-the-art as an intrinsic
>limit.  They'll get faster.

According to "CD-ROM: The New Papyrus" by Microsoft Press, faster data
transfer from CD-ROMs is unlikely because the frequency of the data starts
to approach the frequency of the servo mechanisms used to keep the optics
on track and in focus.

				-- David Schachter
				   (daisy!david or well!davids)

Disclaimer: I'm wrong about nearly everything.
Cute quote: That's not funny.

mrd@sun.mcs.clarkson.EDU (Michael R. DeCorte) (01/11/88)

   >>CD ROM roots would be bad because CD ROM's are blindingly slow.
   >Currently true.  But don't take the current state-of-the-art as an intrinsic
   >limit.  They'll get faster.

   According to "CD-ROM: The New Papyrus" by Microsoft Press, faster data

The reason CD-ROMS are so horribly slow has more to do with the seek
times.  In designing the format of CD-ROMS it was felt (I believe by
Sony) that the disks should be similar to the audio disks.  The audio
disks do not have tracks exactly but instead have one very big spiral
track.  This is great for audio, no breaks in the sound when you have
to go to the next track, but for computers this stinks; where does
track 5 start - about there someplace, +/- a track.  Last I heard seek
times were something like 1/2 a second.  Now this could be wrong as I
haven't been keeping up for the past 2 years but I don't think they
have changed the format.


Michael DeCorte
mrd@clutx.clarkson.edu
mrd@clutx.bitnet

These opinions do not necessarily represent Clarkson U.

tainter@ihlpg.ATT.COM (Tainter) (01/12/88)

In article <791@daisy.UUCP>, david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter) writes:
> According to "CD-ROM: The New Papyrus" by Microsoft Press, faster data
> transfer from CD-ROMs is unlikely because the frequency of the data starts
> to approach the frequency of the servo mechanisms used to keep the optics
> on track and in focus.
> 				-- David Schachter
Yes.  But, that is a discussion of data transfer rate, which is not what makes
CD roms slow.  What makes them slow is seek times.  Optical disks give you very
dense packing of tracks, this means you need very fine advances, which means
careful movement, which means slow (relatively, have you ever used a cassette
with a C64?).

Also, what is to say we can't remork CD roms with alternative servos?

--j.a.tainter

david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter) (01/13/88)

In article <4603@ihlpg.ATT.COM> tainter@ihlpg.ATT.COM (Tainter) writes:
>In article <791@daisy.UUCP>, david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter) writes:
>> According to "CD-ROM: The New Papyrus" by Microsoft Press, faster data
>> transfer from CD-ROMs is unlikely because the frequency of the data starts
>> to approach the frequency of the servo mechanisms used to keep the optics
>> on track and in focus.
>> 				-- David Schachter
>Yes.  But, that is a discussion of data transfer rate, which is not what makes
>CD roms slow.  What makes them slow is seek times.  Optical disks give you very
>dense packing of tracks, this means you need very fine advances, which means
>careful movement, which means slow (relatively, have you ever used a cassette
>with a C64?).
>
>Also, what is to say we can't remork CD roms with alternative servos?
>
>--j.a.tainter


The surface of a CD-ROM isn't too flat.  And the rotation rate of a CD-ROM
varies as the head moves in and out.  (Unlike magnetic disk drives which have
constant _angular_ velocity, the Compact Disk format has constant _linear_
velocity.)  And the CD-ROM isn't centered on the spindle too well, either.

These factors combine to make it difficult to seek on a CD-ROM.  To move to a
particular sector, you must be able to read the sector id.  To read the sector
id, you must be rotating at the correct rate.  To rotate at the correct rate
must know what sector you are on.  Combine this with a non-flat surface and an
off-center disk and you have a non-trivial engineering endeavor.  Fast seeking
is hard and not needed for consumer _audio_ applications.  Therefore, the price
break due to volume production won't be as great as you might want.

Note that changing tracks (and actually, CD-ROM doesn't have "tracks"-- it is
a single 3-mile long spiral groove, on a full disk) requires changing the
rotation rate of the disk, if you want to keep transferring at the full rate of
the CD-ROM.  There is a limit to how fast you can speed up or slow down a
CD-ROM, due to inertia.  (The full speed transfer rate is pitiful-- less than
seventy kilobytes a second, after taking out the error correcting code for CD-
ROM.)

moore@UTKCS2.CS.UTK.EDU (Keith Moore) (01/13/88)

J. A. Tainter <tainter@ihlpg.ATT.COM> writes:
>In article <791@daisy.UUCP>, david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter) writes:
>> According to "CD-ROM: The New Papyrus" by Microsoft Press, faster data
>> transfer from CD-ROMs is unlikely because the frequency of the data starts
>> to approach the frequency of the servo mechanisms used to keep the optics
>> on track and in focus.
>> 				-- David Schachter
>Yes.  But, that is a discussion of data transfer rate, which is not what makes
>CD roms slow.  What makes them slow is seek times.  Optical disks give you very
>dense packing of tracks, this means you need very fine advances, which means
>careful movement, which means slow (relatively, have you ever used a cassette
>with a C64?).
>
>Also, what is to say we can't remork CD roms with alternative servos?
>
>--j.a.tainter
>
There are two major problems with improving the access times of CD-ROM drives:

1.  Difficulties in positioning the laser head.  This is due to the 
    "dense packing of tracks", as well as the fact that the CD-ROM
    is laid out in a spiral, not concentric circles, and uses CLV
    (constant linear velocity) encoding.  So the drive doesn't know
    exactly where to place the head to access a given frame of the
    disc; it has to use a successive approximation technique.
2.  The disc rotates at a very slow speed.  Even if the drive knew
    exactly where to place the laser,  you would have to wait on
    average 1/2 of a disc revolution.  As it is you usually have to
    wait longer.  With frame-to-frame seek times of 1/2 second, a
    large portion of this delay is due to rotational latency.  You can
    speed this up somewhat for CD-ROMs (it has to be fixed for audio
    players), but you start running into limitations of the optics,
    the decoder chips, the servos, and the control systems.  These can
    all be redesigned, but by then your CD-ROM player doesn't even
    resemble an audio CD player anymore; perhaps it can't even play
    audio disks.  So it's going to be expensive, at least until
    CD-ROMs become commonplace enough to make it worthwhile to design
    the players from scratch.

Keith Moore
UT Computer Science Dept.	Internet: moore@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu
107 Ayres Hall, UT Campus	CSnet: moore@tennessee
Knoxville Tennessee		BITNET: moore@utkcs1
    
    
   

norman@a.cs.okstate.edu (Norman Graham) (01/13/88)

in article <4603@ihlpg.ATT.COM>, tainter@ihlpg.ATT.COM (Tainter) says:
> What makes them slow is seek times.  Optical disks give you very
> dense packing of tracks, this means you need very fine advances, which means
> careful movement, which means slow [...]

We must remember that a track on a CD-ROM is very different than a track
on a conventional magnetic hard disk. Tracks may be different sizes on the
same disk (there may even only be one track for the whole disk (or maybe
there has to be two, I don't remember)).  What makes CD-ROM slow is that
even if you know the minute, second, and sector of the data that you
want, all the drive can do is get close to where it thinks it might
be and start streamming off data until it gets to what you wanted.

> Also, what is to say we can't remork CD roms with alternative servos?

We could, but it would defeat one advantage of CD-ROM drives... they're
cheap (or at least they will be by the 2nd quarter of this year :-).
Since to make a CD-ROM drive you take a CD-Audio drive (which has a HUGE
market as compared to CD-ROM), take out a lot of electronics, and put a 
little bit of electronics back in, CD-ROM drives should approach the
price of CD-Audio drives (< $200 US).

> --j.a.tainter

--
Norman Graham
Oklahoma State University              Internet:  norman@a.cs.okstate.edu
Computing and Information Sciences         UUCP:  {cbosgd, ihnp4,
219 Mathematical Sciences Building                 rutgers}!okstate!norman
Stillwater, OK  74078-0599

paula@bcsaic.UUCP (Paul Allen) (01/14/88)

Several people have tried to explain why cd-roms are so slow, but noone
has gotten it right yet.  It doesn't have anything to do with the spiral
track, or the fine track pitch.  Cd-rom drives are basically re-packaged 
audio CD players.  For audio, there is no requirement for fast random access,
so there has been no push to develop small light read heads.  Since the
head is large and relatively massive, it cannot be moved very quickly.
Hence, we have seek times on the order of 1 second.  Improving the seek
times of cd-roms will require new technology read heads and a
corresponding significant increase in cost.  It'll come.  Patience will
win in the end!

Paul

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul L. Allen                       | paula@boeing.com
Boeing Advanced Technology Center   | ...!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!bcsaic!paula