Time: Tue Nov 05 07:21:24 1996
To: tab@hollyent.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: 9 GB single letter drive
Cc:
Bcc:
<snip>
>>>> I am looking for a computer
>>>> supplier who can assemble
>>>> a dual-Pentium DOS machine, 64MB,
>>>> with a 9GB hard disk (7200 rpm),
>>>> a single letter drive ("C:")
>>>> and the new OEM version
>>>> of Windows 95. Please respond
>>>> here. Thanks.
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Are you sure you want it all on one drive?
>>>Your sector size will be huge,
>>>and that means a giant waste-o-space!
>>
>>That's precisely the problem I am
>>trying to avoid. One solution is
>>to use DRVSPACE, but it will divide
>>a 9GB drive into 18 x 500MB partitions.
>>I want a single "C:" partition, but
>>I want the version of Windows 95
>>which has a fix for the FAT limit
>>of 65,535 entries. I believe it is
>>called Windows 950, but I am not
>>sure about this. I do not want to
>>use DRVSPACE; I want a single "C:"
>>partition, uncompressed, so that I
>>can start building C:\FREEDOMS and
>>load everything underneath it.
>>
>>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>>
>>Enterprises 602-922-1639 - www.hollyent.com
>>
<snip>
>>
>>If anybody would like my 2 cents worth.
>>I think a new fast and wide SCSI-3
>>drive would be in order.
That's hardware. The problem
with 16-bit FAT's is software,
logical, I believe. The SCSI-3's
are really beautiful though.
JES has RAID controllers with
triple porting: 3 x 15 devices
per controller, and some PCI
motherboards will accommodate
up to 4 of these controllers, so
get this:
4 controllers x 3 ports x 15 devices
= 180 disks @ 9 gigabytes!!!
Have a little storage, maybe?
It is just I don't see anyway around huge sector
>size with a 9 gig un-partitoned.
There is ... with the 32-bit FAT.
I am being told now that it is
version "B" of Windows 95 which
solves this problem. The cluster
sizes are optimal with the 32-bit FAT.
(Sector sizes don't change; cluster
sizes do change.)
What are you going to do for backup, 9
>gig's is alot to lose at once.
Iomega JAZ drive (1GB/disk),
with incremental backups, e.g.:
C:> xcopy freedoms d:\freedoms /m/e/v
I have one on an Adaptec SCSI-II, and
it is incredibly fast. Norton Disk
Doctor (NDD) runs faster on it, than on my
Western Digital HD with DRVSPACE.
NDD just screams, believe it or not.
Are you planning on a dual RAID setup or
>just rely on a tape drive for backup.
See above.
I think you can do it with SCSI-3
>Drive and quite fast to at that.
They are no doubt fast, but they
do not accommodate the large FAT,
without a modified operating system.
This is what I believe at present,
based on what I know (or think I know).
As for Dual Pentium, I am using a Tyan
>Tomcat 2 with Dual 133's running Windows N.T. 4.0 if you use Win 95 it
>won't recognize Dual Processors so one will be wasted.
Nice ... very nice. You are running
more than 500 MIPs, then, yes? It must
be very fast; how terrific! Green with
envy over here. The 200Mhz Pentiums
are clocking over 400 MIPs, uni-processor,
so a dual-Pentium Pro is clocking 800 MIPs.
We are fast approaching the GIP range
(I can believe I said that :). The Micron
machines are a nice mail-order source.
Aha, I am stuck with Windows 95 then,
is seems. Does the HPFS in NT solve
the 16-bit FAT problem too? I am trying
to avoid all new software for the NT
environment. I have a lot invested
in specific software that works for me;
this is not a minor consideration.
After much fiddling, I finally have two
machines running Windows 3.11, and everything
works (believe it or not).
You have to run Win
>N.T. 4.0 Workstation or Server or go to an OS/2 system. I know Windows 95
>won't cut it.
So, I sacrifice the extra CPU
for the larger file store.
What I do is mostly I/O anyway,
so this is a small price to pay,
really. The extra RAM (64MB)
will also help with speed, when
several programs are running
at the same time.
but the Win N.T. 4.0 looks like Windows 95 on the face, an
>easey transition to N.T. and with dual Pentiums Speed, Speed,
>Speed,...........
So, NT 4.0 with dual Pentiums
will allow a single letter drive,
without waste-o-space ...
does that summarize it nicely?
>Just my little bits of knowledge.............Later....Bill.........>
> IKE CLANTON "The Meanist Gunfighter To Escape The O.K. Corral."
Thanks very much for all your input.
This is helping me a lot to isolate my
choices.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail