[comp.sys.amiga.tech] st277n drive and sectors per track & cyl

mpalumbo@sunybcs.uucp (Michael Palumbo) (01/25/89)

i just bought a st277n drive and noticed that it has 26 sectors
per track but only has 155 sectors per cylinder.  How does this 
work with the mountlist where you only indicate number of sectors
per track?  Will this drive work or am i missing something?

where does the number of sectors per track get used?
does the format command issue track formats, or does
it format a sector at a time?

so many questions, so little time.  
please help
thanks

jdow@gryphon.COM (J. Dow) (01/25/89)

In article <3836@cs.Buffalo.EDU> mpalumbo@sunybcs.UUCP (Michael Palumbo) writes:
>
>i just bought a st277n drive and noticed that it has 26 sectors
>per track but only has 155 sectors per cylinder.  How does this 
>work with the mountlist where you only indicate number of sectors
>per track?  Will this drive work or am i missing something?
>
>where does the number of sectors per track get used?
>does the format command issue track formats, or does
>it format a sector at a time?
>
The proper trick (or at least the easiest) is to tell the mountlist that the
drive has only one head and 155 blockspertrack. That is the way I use the
drive here and it works peachy with both StarDrive and HardFrame and with
both OldFS and FFS.

-- 
Sometimes a bird in the hand leaves a sticky deposit.
Perhaps it were best it remain there in the bush with the other one.

{@_@}
	jdow@bix (where else?)		Sometimes the dragon wins. Sometimes
	jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM		the knight. Does the fair maiden ever
	{backbone}!gryphon!jdow		win? Surely both the knight and dragon
					stink. Maybe the maiden should suicide?
					Better yet - she should get an Amiga and
					quit playing with dragons and knights.

kodiak@amiga.UUCP (Robert R. Burns) (01/26/89)

In article  jdow@gryphon.COM (J. Dow) writes:
)In article  mpalumbo@sunybcs.UUCP (Michael Palumbo) writes:
)>i just bought a st277n drive and noticed that it has 26 sectors
)>per track but only has 155 sectors per cylinder.  How does this 
)>work with the mountlist where you only indicate number of sectors
)>per track?  Will this drive work or am i missing something?

)The proper trick (or at least the easiest) is to tell the mountlist that the
)drive has only one head and 155 blockspertrack. That is the way I use the
)drive here and it works peachy with both StarDrive and HardFrame and with
)both OldFS and FFS.

That's what I do too ... but please don't use this trick with a 2090 or 2090A,
because the format command for these is currently limited to 64 sectors per
track, so you won't be able to format the drive w/ (1, 155) (heads, bpt).
You have to come up with a heads*bpt*(hicyl-lowcyl+1) that best represents
your partitioning configuration and respects the 64 bpt limit.  The drive
should work fine, but you won't be able to access all the sectors with one
partition.

- Kodiak
-- 
Bob Burns, amiga!kodiak                   _
| /_  _|. _ |      Commodore __          |_) _ |_  _ )'
|<(_)(_)|(_\|<      /\ |  ||| _` /\      |_)(_\| )(_\ |
| \ Software    ___/..\|\/|||__|/..\___           Faith

cjp@antique.UUCP (Charles Poirier) (02/03/89)

In article <3277@amiga.UUCP> kodiak@tooter.UUCP (Robert Burns) writes:
>In article  jdow@gryphon.COM (J. Dow) writes:
>)The proper trick (or at least the easiest) is to tell the mountlist that the
>)drive has only one head and 155 blockspertrack.
>
>That's what I do too ... but please don't use this trick with a 2090 or 2090A,
>because the format command for these is currently limited to 64 sectors per
>track, so you won't be able to format the drive w/ (1, 155) (heads, bpt).
>You have to come up with a heads*bpt*(hicyl-lowcyl+1) that best represents
>your partitioning configuration and respects the 64 bpt limit.  The drive
>should work fine, but you won't be able to access all the sectors with one
>partition.
>-- 
>Bob Burns, amiga!kodiak                   _

Could you elaborate on that please?  How would I know if there was
trouble?  I formatted my Quantum Q280 80-meg HD (using an A2090) as 2
surfaces @ 95 sectors, with one 20 MB OFS partition and a second 60 MB
FFS partition which is about 70% full.  By comparison, 64/95 sectors is
only 67%, so at least I know I'm not wrapping around and overwriting
already-used sectors.  The format command didn't complain.  The only
trouble has been one hard R/W error in a file, discovered while making
an incremental backup.  Is that a symptom of a sector that the format
command missed?

-- 
	Charles Poirier   (decvax,ucbvax,mcnc,attmail)!vax135!cjp

   "Docking complete...       Docking complete...       Docking complete..."