128a-1ha@e260-4e.berkeley.edu (03/25/91)
I just bought a hard drive with more than 1024 tracks. Someone told me that Smartdrv won't operate with such a drive, is that true? The drive is a Connor CP-30104 (1522 tracks 4 head 39 sectors) Also I notice that fdisk only reconize 78meg (1024 track 4 head 39 sec) Is the only way to get the extra tracks is to use something like Disk Manager or SpeedStor, if so which one is better? (Must be compatible with Windows) Help! Help! Help! Nelson 128a-1ha@web.berkeley.edu
mqvortru@iiic.ethz.ch (Michael Heide Qvortrup) (03/25/91)
In article <1991Mar25.104137.20709@agate.berkeley.edu> 128a-1ha@e260-4e.berkeley.edu writes: >... >Also I notice that fdisk only reconize 78meg (1024 track 4 head 39 sec) >Is the only way to get the extra tracks is to use something like Disk Manager >or SpeedStor, if so which one is better? (Must be compatible with Windows) >... I don't know about compatibility between Disk Manager and Windows when you have more than 1024 tracks (I don't think my own disk has more, but I can't tell, the thing is at home and I'm not). I can say though, that my system (12MHz AT with a 20 MB normal disk and a 40 MB extra disk), where Disk Manager controls the 40 MB disk, has had no problems with Windows. It has been running since autumn. I think the combination Disk Manager & Windows is okay, also for more tracks than 1024 (after all, Disk Manager should hide this). What won't work, is Nortons disk organiser and Disk Manager. It crashed. Fortunately, it didn't loose any files, but I haven't dared it again. And no, Windows was not running. --Mike
jcwasik@PacBell.COM (Joe Wasik) (03/26/91)
In article <1991Mar25.104137.20709@agate.berkeley.edu> 128a-1ha@e260-4e.berkeley.edu writes: >I just bought a hard drive with more than 1024 tracks. Someone told me >that Smartdrv won't operate with such a drive, is that true? This should be in "most frequently asked questions". Yes, you have a problem. Not only with SmartDrive, but lots of other disk-type utilities. I used to have an 80meg disk and SSTOR.SYS but gave up after the n'th program bombed. Then I used fdisk to format the first 1024 tracks (about 62 meg) and now everything works. -- Joe Wasik, Pac*Bell, 2600 Camino Ramon, Rm 4E750V, San Ramon, CA (415)823-2422 email: jcwasik@clib.PacBell.COM or [...]!pacbell!clib!jcwasik "I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove anything" -- B. Simpson
ga1056@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (George D.T. Lu) (03/26/91)
In article <1991Mar25.104137.20709@agate.berkeley.edu> 128a-1ha@e260-4e.berkeley.edu writes: >I just bought a hard drive with more than 1024 tracks. Someone told me >that Smartdrv won't operate with such a drive, is that true? > >The drive is a Connor CP-30104 (1522 tracks 4 head 39 sectors) > >Also I notice that fdisk only reconize 78meg (1024 track 4 head 39 sec) >Is the only way to get the extra tracks is to use something like Disk Manager >or SpeedStor, if so which one is better? (Must be compatible with Windows) > >Help! Help! Help! > >Nelson 128a-1ha@web.berkeley.edu I just spent a part part of last week dealing this problem, the solution was to find the low level formatter for the particluar disk controller you are using. I had a 40MB MFM HD and I used disk manager with DOS 3.3 with no problem for a very long time. I recently bought a 120MB Microscience 120MB RLL drive (1314 cylinders, 7 heads, 26 sectors) together with a OMTI RLL controller from Scientific Micro. Using the Disk Manager that came with the drive could format it to full capacity. The thing is, the biggest primary DOS partition it would permit is only about 60MB, the rest have to go into the second partition (the sector translation business). I wanted to have a single partition and want no problem with smartdrv.sys, so I quit out of Diskmanager after disk initialization (before partitioning) and run fdisk. But fdisk would recognize the HD as something like (291 cylinders) x (more than 200 heads) x (a sector count that I cannot recall now). I settled for Disk Manager for a week, running without smartdrv.sys, and only in standard mode, until I found out there is another formatter available on Scientific Micro's bulletin board. It set up my CMOS to the HD of the closet match, then wrote the correct HD parameter onto the disk. By that afternoon I was running enhancement mode with smartdrv.sys again. I understand that Western Digital 1006-SR2 has a formatter built-in that can be involked using DEBUG. If you have another controller like I do, get the right formatter from the manufacturer (unless your dealer is more helpful than mine) and remove that DMDRV.BIN from you config.sys. Hope that help. George Lu dlu@ucsd.edu UC San Diego ECE Dept. standard disclaimer apply.
calloway@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Frank Calloway) (03/26/91)
> In comp.windows.ms, 128a-1ha@e260-4e.berkeley.edu writes: > I just bought a hard drive with more than 1024 tracks. Someone told me > that Smartdrv won't operate with such a drive, is that true? > Also I notice that fdisk only reconize 78meg (1024 track 4 head 39 sec) > Is the only way to get the extra tracks is to use something like Disk Manager > or SpeedStor, if so which one is better? (Must be compatible with Windows) It isn't a question of whether SMARTDRV.SYS will work with your hard disk. The bottom line is that *MS-DOS* does not directly support drives that have more than 1024 cylinders. Thus, it doesn't matter what SMARTDRV can or cannot do. Yes, you'll need a disk manager program if you want to use the full capacity of your disk. I've used Ontrack's Disk Manager (it comes free with most hard disks) and it worked fine. A warning: From what I've read, all of the disk manager programs have conflicts with SMARTDRV. When Microsoft wrote SMARTDRV, they broke their own rule and let it write directly to hardware (instead of going through the BIOS calls). Unless Microsoft has fixed this incompatibility, using SMARTDRV and disk manager software together can corrupt data on your hard disk. (Trust me -- I've personally seen it happen :)). There are a couple of ways to fix this problem. The simplest is to not use SMARTDRV. But this approach will greatly reduce the performance of your system (no disk caching). I'd recommend that you find another disk cache program and use it. SMARTDRV seems to be the only caching program that writes directly to hardware, so any of the others (including the popular shareware stuff) should work. I've tried this approach and it works well. Frank Calloway Hewlett-Packard Company Loveland, CO
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/27/91)
One thing you will want to know is that INT13 is the standard BIOS way of accessing the disk. Unfortunately, IBM in their infinite foresight and wisdom only allocated 10 bits for the track number. Where you get screwed is if the track number goes over 1024 and it wraps around to 0. It is often physically possible. Many WD controllers, for example, have 11-bit track registers. But you have to go directly to the hardware. Any use of the standard IBM INT13 could eventually result in wrap around and trashing of your first few tracks. Some programs like DM (presumably) install their own INT13. This is ok until you have some application that bypasses the new INT13 but only has 10 bits for track number. Then wrap around will occur again. -- Sun PC-NFS: for the engineer who really want a Sun and got a PC.
sgombosi@isis.cs.du.edu (Stephen O. Gombosi) (03/28/91)
I had to use Disk Manager to get my CP3204 to work properly. It works fine, but SMARTDRV is out of the question. You do need to modify the SYSTEM.INI file to contain the following line: VirtualHDIrq=off So that Windows doesn't do strange stuff with the disk interrupts. If you fail to include that line, you will be unable to run in 386 enhanced mode (in my case, the screen blanked out and the machine locked up completely). You will also have to use a temporary swap file. This is a known bug in Windows. I heard that it was going to be fixed in 3.1, but that's just rumor. *** Once again, do NOT use SMARTDRV with this sort of configuration !!! *** It will appear to work just fine, BUT it WILL corrupt your disk data!!!
philba@microsoft.UUCP (Phil BARRETT) (04/03/91)
In article <2010008@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM> calloway@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Frank Calloway) writes: > >It isn't a question of whether SMARTDRV.SYS will work with your hard disk. >The bottom line is that *MS-DOS* does not directly support drives that have >more than 1024 cylinders. Thus, it doesn't matter what SMARTDRV can or >cannot do. Sorry but this is incorrect. The limitation is in ROM BIOS INT13 interface. The cylinder is specified with 10 bits of info. If the limitation were in MS-DOS, no driver alone would solve the problem. Check any rom bios tech ref. > >A warning: From what I've read, all of the disk manager programs have >conflicts with SMARTDRV. When Microsoft wrote SMARTDRV, they broke their >own rule and let it write directly to hardware (instead of going through >the BIOS calls). Unless Microsoft has fixed this incompatibility, using >SMARTDRV and disk manager software together can corrupt data on your >hard disk. (Trust me -- I've personally seen it happen :)). I dont know where you heard this but Smartdrv *does not* write to the hardware, it calls (er, ints) the ROM BIOS INT13. What ever rules you are refering to, they weren't broken. The conflict is much more subtile than just `all disk managers'. There are two cases where you should not use smartdrv and a disk manager: - drive type does not match the selected ROM BIOS supported drive type. For example, you get a new disk and cant find a cylinder/surface match in the list of drives that your ROM BIOS supports -- dont use smartdrv. - your drive has > 1024 cylinders (and you want to use beyond 1024) Also, one special case where smartdrv is OK for >1024 cylinder drives is if you have a `cylinder mapping' controller that makes the drive look like a ROM BIOS supported drive. By the way, you should read the PC-Week study on windows and disk caches. Its got some interesting info and points out a cache that does write to the HW (and its not smartdrv). It was either in a late feb or early march issue. Cheers! Phil Barrett Microsoft standard disclaimer applies -- the above does not necessarily reflect the views of my employer,