nesman@inmet.inmet.com (07/05/90)
Does anyone have a recommedation for a format.dat entry for a CDC 9720-1230 on a 753 controller (SMD). Sun does not support the 1.2GB disk. Stephen Nesman nesman@inmet.inmet.com uunet!inmet!nesman
pjg@urth.acsu.buffalo.edu (Paul Graham) (07/07/90)
nesman@inmet.inmet.com writes: |Does anyone have a recommedation for a format.dat entry for a CDC |9720-1230 on a 753 controller (SMD). Sun does not support the 1.2GB disk. Hmmmm, of course Sun supports this drive for the IPI controller but I thought I'd just send it on in case it could help for a 753. So I looked in format.dat and lo there was no 9720-1230 on my 4/60. Odd. Anyway here's one for a 9720 for the IPI. disk_type = "CDC IPI 9720" \ : ctlr = "ISP-80" \ : ncyl = 1631 : acyl = 1 : pcyl = 1633 : nhead = 15 : nsect = 82 \ : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50400 : skew = 0 : precomp = 0 disk_type = "CDC IPI 9722" \ : ctlr = "ISP-80" \ : ncyl = 1630 : acyl = 1 : pcyl = 1632 : nhead = 7 : nsect = 156 \ : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 100800 : skew = 0 : precomp = 0 What makes this interesting is the 9722 entry. I'm still waiting for my 9722 but at least there's some hope.
mgb@cs.utexas.edu (Michael G. Burner) (07/13/90)
Isn't the correct name of Xylogic's controller the "7053"? Why do people
insist on dropping the "0"? Anyway, here is the entry you are looking for
(with a sample partition table):
disk_type = "CDC 9720-1230" \
: ctlr = XD7053 \
: ncyl = 1633 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1635 : nhead = 15 : nsect = 83 \
: rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50400 : bps = 600
partition = "CDC 9720-1230" \
: disk = "CDC 9720-1230" : ctlr = XD7053 \
: a = 0, 8715 : b = 7, 33615 : c = 0, 2033085 : d = 34, 978570 \
: f = 7, 1012185 : g = 817, 1012185
-Mike-poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (07/17/90)
In article <9892@brazos.Rice.edu> xait!mgb@cs.utexas.edu (Michael G. Burner) writes: > >disk_type = "CDC 9720-1230" \ > : ctlr = XD7053 \ > : ncyl = 1633 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1635 : nhead = 15 : nsect = 83 \ > : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50400 : bps = 600 This will not work correctly. The 7053 requires an extra sector configured on the drive for slip sectoring. This implies that the drive would have to be set for 84 sectors. At 84 sectors, a 9720-1230 has exactly 600 bytes per sector. Since the 7053 uses 512 byte sectors with a minimum of 88 bytes overhead, plus 4 bytes minimum for the runt sector, this adds up to at least 604 bytes per sector required. This means that the next setting of 83 sectors on the drive (606 bytes per sector) and 82 set in the format.dat parameters is the correct setting. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
mikey@uunet.uu.net (Mike Fields) (07/18/90)
In article <9892@brazos.Rice.edu>, xait!mgb@cs.utexas.edu (Michael G. Burner) writes: > Isn't the correct name of Xylogic's controller the "7053"? Why do people > insist on dropping the "0"? Anyway, here is the entry you are looking for > (with a sample partition table): > > disk_type = "CDC 9720-1230" \ > : ctlr = XD7053 \ > : ncyl = 1633 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1635 : nhead = 15 : nsect = 83 \ > : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50400 : bps = 600 > > partition = "CDC 9720-1230" \ > : disk = "CDC 9720-1230" : ctlr = XD7053 \ > : a = 0, 8715 : b = 7, 33615 : c = 0, 2033085 : d = 34, 978570 \ > : f = 7, 1012185 : g = 817, 1012185 Be aware that there are 2 xylogics 7053 controllers. They are known as the -105 and -106. Sun only sells the 105 (from what I have been able to find out). The 106 is a faster controller. The 105 seems to work fine UNLESS you have to format the drive. When I did that, (I had a new drive with a bunch of hard errors), It was almost impossible to get the drive to pass surface analysis without finding big blocks of errors (which always started on a track with a known defect) and would show up somewhere else if you tried to format again. The 106 is fast enough to handle these problems (it took me two days of trying to get format to take!). A 105 can be upgraded to a 106 for approx/ $500. You need to talk to xylogics to find a vendor you can go back thru if you are using a PO. I think you can go direct to xylogics if you send check/cash. Call them and make sure. You can tell what controller you have by a sticker on the back of the controller board. It only took me a week to find out that there were two versions of the controller! ======================================================= Mike Fields uw-beaver!ssc-vax!shuksan!mikey (206) 657-6136 [work] 12022 NE 138th Pl. (206) 821-3492 [home] Kirkland, Wa. 98034
sjs@nsco.network.com (Steve Senum) (07/25/90)
In article <9987@brazos.Rice.edu> poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) writes: > >In article <9892@brazos.Rice.edu> xait!mgb@cs.utexas.edu (Michael G. Burner) writes: >> >>disk_type = "CDC 9720-1230" \ >> : ctlr = XD7053 \ >> : ncyl = 1633 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1635 : nhead = 15 : nsect = 83 \ >> : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50400 : bps = 600 > >This will not work correctly. The 7053 requires an extra sector configured >on the drive for slip sectoring. This implies that the drive would have to >be set for 84 sectors. At 84 sectors, a 9720-1230 has exactly 600 bytes >per sector. Since the 7053 uses 512 byte sectors with a minimum of 88 >bytes overhead, plus 4 bytes minimum for the runt sector, this adds up to >at least 604 bytes per sector required. This means that the next setting >of 83 sectors on the drive (606 bytes per sector) and 82 set in the >format.dat parameters is the correct setting. When I first installed our CDC Sabre 1230 drive I called Xylogics support at 617-272-8140. They said that my 7053 controller had to be at a certain ECO level (a "106" in the part number on the board instead of a "105") in order to handle the 1230's 3.0 Megabyte/second transfer rate. They also said to use a sector size of 599 (instead of the normal 600). Most (if not all) of the 7053 controllers sold by Sun are *not* at the proper ECO level. The ones sold through distributors are. My format.dat entries are: disk_type = "CDC 9720-1230" \ : ctlr = XD7053 \ : ncyl = 1633 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1635 : nhead = 15 : nsect = 83 \ : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50400 : bps = 599 partition = "CDC 9720-1230" \ : disk = "CDC 9720-1230" : ctlr = XD7053 \ : a = 0, 33615 : b = 27, 67230: c = 0, 2033085: g = 81, 1932240 The partition entry is somewhat arbitrary. Steve Senum (sjs@network.com)
jms@tardis.tymnet.com (Joe Smith) (07/26/90)
In article <9892@brazos.Rice.edu> xait!mgb@cs.utexas.edu (Michael G. Burner) writes: >Isn't the correct name of Xylogic's controller the "7053"? Why do people >insist on dropping the "0"? My understanding of these controllers is that only 2 disks can be attached to the 753 (xy0 and xy0), but 4 disks can be attached to the 7053 (xd0-xd3). Therefore the "0" is significant. Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | SMTP: jms@tardis.tymnet.com or jms@gemini.tymnet.com BT Tymnet Tech Services | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!tardis!jms PO Box 49019, MS-C41 | BIX: smithjoe | 12 PDP-10s still running! "POPJ P," San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | humorous dislaimer: "My Amiga speaks for me."
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (07/30/90)
In article <10320@brazos.Rice.edu> jms@tardis.tymnet.com (Joe Smith) writes: >In article <9892@brazos.Rice.edu> xait!mgb@cs.utexas.edu (Michael G. Burner) writes: >>Isn't the correct name of Xylogic's controller the "7053"? Why do people >>insist on dropping the "0"? > >My understanding of these controllers is that only 2 disks can be attached >to the 753 (xy0 and xy0), but 4 disks can be attached to the 7053 >(xd0-xd3). Therefore the "0" is significant. This is incorrect. Both the 753 and 7053 are functionally equivalent, both supporting up to 4 drives. The difference is... 753 small (6u) vme size. 7053 large (9u) vme size. Developed primarily for Sun systems. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254