[comp.arch] AT bus & disks

rik@june.cs.washington.edu (Rik Littlefield) (05/19/89)

In article <4229@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
> True, and known. But the problem is still the AT bus because, in general,
> the bottleneck on UNIX tends to be disk. The typical huge disk buffers
> help a lot, but it's still a problem.

This seems to be arguing that the AT bus can't keep up with disk transfer
rate, which I have trouble believing.  I don't recall that the benchmark
configurations were ever specified exactly.  Could the observed differences
in system performance be due to different disk interleaving, or even
something as crude as disk seek or transfer speeds?  Or perhaps some
controller difference makes one of the drivers jump through more hoops?
Blaming the bus seems a bit premature here.

--Rik