[9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[Peter A. Cejchan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 398 bytes --]

Hi, folks,

I am about to buy an internal HD for my native Plan9 box.
I need 2TB or more, can anyone recommend me a model that is tested to work?
Native, not p9p.

Also, can anyone recommend a hi-res video card, SXGA+ or better, 24-bit
depth?
I am aware of the "Supported PC Hardware" page, of course, however, I would
appreciate your personal experience.

Thanks, best regards,
++pac

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 436 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[David du Colombier]

> I need 2TB or more, can anyone recommend me a model that is tested to work?

I'm currently using some Seagate Barracuda ST2000DM001 in one of my
file servers.

--
David du Colombier

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[Peter A. Cejchan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 372 bytes --]

Thanks, David! Does it run BellLabs Plan9, or does it require Erik's 9atom?

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:26 AM, David du Colombier <0intro@gmail.com>wrote:

> > I need 2TB or more, can anyone recommend me a model that is tested to
> work?
>
> I'm currently using some Seagate Barracuda ST2000DM001 in one of my
> file servers.
>
> --
> David du Colombier
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 717 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[David du Colombier]

> Thanks, David! Does it run BellLabs Plan9, or does it require Erik's 9atom?

I run Plan 9 from Bell Labs.

--
David du Colombier

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[dexen deVries]

On Wednesday 20 of February 2013 12:22:26 David du Colombier wrote:
> > Thanks, David! Does it run BellLabs Plan9, or does it require Erik's
> > 9atom?
> 
> I run Plan 9 from Bell Labs.

Plan 9 from Bell Labs from Bell Labs :^)

-- 
dexen deVries

[[[↓][→]]]

[9fans] arcnet

[steve]

just a straw poll, anyone here use arcnet or know of any significant modern use,

my employer uses it for data comms in TV stations, but this is becoming
superseded by ethernet these days, are we the last bastion?

-Steve

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[Matthew Veety]

It seems so. I haven't heard it being used in my lifetime.

On Feb 20, 2013, at 11:57, steve <steve@quintile.net> wrote:

> 
> just a straw poll, anyone here use arcnet or know of any significant modern use,
> 
> my employer uses it for data comms in TV stations, but this is becoming
> superseded by ethernet these days, are we the last bastion?
> 
> -Steve
> 
> 

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[lucio]

> my employer uses it for data comms in TV stations, but this is becoming
> superseded by ethernet these days, are we the last bastion?

How do they propose to maintain it when the equipment starts failing?

++L

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[Steve Simon]

> How do they propose to maintain it when the equipment starts failing?

Not sure what you mean, but we run arcnet in bus mode (no central hub), on
75 ohm coax with modified PCI cards using 75ohm terminations - 75ohm coax
abounds in TV stations.

The advantage of this is we can use existing Video wiring for control systems,
and there is no single point of failure.

-Steve

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[hiro]

In spite of ARCNET's deterministic operation and historic suitability
for real-time environments such as process control, the general
availability of switched gigabit Ethernet and Quality of service
capabilities in Ethernet switches has all but eliminated ARCNET today.

However, because of its simple, robust nature, ARCNET controllers are
still sold and used in industrial, embedded, and automotive
applications.

they say it's pretty deterministic. good read from wikipedia.

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[Charles Forsyth]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 313 bytes --]

On 21 February 2013 12:54, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:

> they say it's pretty deterministic. good read from wikipedia.


I was disappointed to discover that ARCNET did not, in fact, send packets
by shooting huge electrical arcs from sender to receiver, in the manner of
a proper science fiction film.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 600 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 439 bytes --]



Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 21, 2013, at 6:16 AM, Charles Forsyth <charles.forsyth@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On 21 February 2013 12:54, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>> they say it's pretty deterministic. good read from wikipedia.
> 
> I was disappointed to discover that ARCNET did not, in fact, send packets by shooting huge electrical arcs from sender to receiver, in the manner of a proper science fiction film.

Teslanet?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 978 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[lucio]

> However, because of its simple, robust nature, ARCNET controllers are
> still sold and used in industrial, embedded, and automotive
> applications.

Sounds positively anachronistic.  Thanks for the clarification.

++L

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[erik quanstrom]

> > However, because of its simple, robust nature, ARCNET controllers are
> > still sold and used in industrial, embedded, and automotive
> > applications.
>
> Sounds positively anachronistic.  Thanks for the clarification.

and so is rs-232.  usb is the way of the future.  :-)  i say this with
toungue in cheek, of course.  old does not lie along the useful
axis.

- erik

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[Jeff Sickel]

On Feb 21, 2013, at 12:44 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:

>>> However, because of its simple, robust nature, ARCNET controllers are
>>> still sold and used in industrial, embedded, and automotive
>>> applications.
>>
>> Sounds positively anachronistic.  Thanks for the clarification.
>
> and so is rs-232.  usb is the way of the future.  :-)  i say this with
> toungue in cheek, of course.  old does not lie along the useful
> axis.

rs-232/422/485 has a lot going for it, more so than usb.  Well, at least
until usb-optical cables become cheaper than copper, and even then you've
got component costs that are more expensive.  Moving to ethernet at least
opens up the ability to use MODBUS TCP.

-jas

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[Calvin Morrison]

On 21 February 2013 14:26, Jeff Sickel <jas@corpus-callosum.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 21, 2013, at 12:44 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>
>>>> However, because of its simple, robust nature, ARCNET controllers are
>>>> still sold and used in industrial, embedded, and automotive
>>>> applications.
>>>
>>> Sounds positively anachronistic.  Thanks for the clarification.
>>
>> and so is rs-232.  usb is the way of the future.  :-)  i say this with
>> toungue in cheek, of course.  old does not lie along the useful
>> axis.
>
> rs-232/422/485 has a lot going for it, more so than usb.  Well, at least
> until usb-optical cables become cheaper than copper, and even then you've
> got component costs that are more expensive.  Moving to ethernet at least
> opens up the ability to use MODBUS TCP.
>
> -jas
>
>
>

Anyone look at the website?  Kinda cool

http://www.arcnet.com/

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[hiro]

yeah, an other quote from that website:

Designers write their own application layer to meet their particular
needs and frequently do not advertise the fact that ARCNET is being
used in their product. ARCNET receives no name recognition, but is
frequently the network of choice in embedded applications. It is
hidden from the user, but with over 22 million ARCNET nodes sold gives
credibility that ARCNET is indeed popular.

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[Calvin Morrison]

On 21 February 2013 14:39, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah, an other quote from that website:
>
> Designers write their own application layer to meet their particular
> needs and frequently do not advertise the fact that ARCNET is being
> used in their product. ARCNET receives no name recognition, but is
> frequently the network of choice in embedded applications. It is
> hidden from the user, but with over 22 million ARCNET nodes sold gives
> credibility that ARCNET is indeed popular.
>

It makes me think that it might be congruent to unix in this fashion.
Every day users have no idea what unix servers are, but the internet
runs on it.

Apparently ARCNET used so much, but we never even hear about it! The
silent hero...

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[lucio]

> Not sure what you mean, but we run arcnet in bus mode (no central hub), on
> 75 ohm coax with modified PCI cards using 75ohm terminations - 75ohm coax
> abounds in TV stations.

The cost of maintaining such a system must look prohibitive when
compared with off-the-shelf products.  And then you need device
drivers for every generation of OS that comes along.  I'd be at least
curious as to how these costs are justified.

I mean, I have tens of kilograms of dated network equipment, including
the odd lumps of coax cabling, but no ways could I find a practical
use for it, much as the community I'm in has no funds for more modern
stuff, so we just do without :-(

++L

Re: [9fans] arcnet

[steve]

On 21 Feb 2013, at 17:36, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:

>> Not sure what you mean, but we run arcnet in bus mode (no central hub), on
>> 75 ohm coax with modified PCI cards using 75ohm terminations - 75ohm coax
>> abounds in TV stations.
> 
> The cost of maintaining such a system must look prohibitive when
> compared with off-the-shelf products.  And then you need device
> drivers for every generation of OS that comes along.  I'd be at least
> curious as to how these costs are justified.


not really.

contemporary controls, who manufacture the pci arcnet cards
supply the drivers for windows. we have drivers for the com20020
NIC for our embedded os, and the chips a as cheap as... well, old chips.

our bridge and cards are just a different software on a fairly standard
modular card which fits in our 3u rack system.

if anyone wants detail contact me off-list, this is already creating too much noise.

my real reason for asking was to gauge interest in a plan9 arcnet driver
as i am perfectly placed to write one, but it seems there is no interest at all.
this is a problem thought, i have plenty else to do :-)

> I mean, I have tens of kilograms of dated network equipment, including
> the odd lumps of coax cabling, but no ways could I find a practical
> use for it, much as the community I'm in has no funds for more modern
> stuff, so we just do without :-(
> 
> ++L
> 

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[Nicolas Bercher]

On 20/02/2013 10:37, Peter A. Cejchan wrote:
> Hi, folks,
>
> I am about to buy an internal HD for my native Plan9 box.
> I need 2TB or more, can anyone recommend me a model that is tested to work?
> Native, not p9p.
>
> Also, can anyone recommend a hi-res video card, SXGA+ or better, 24-bit
> depth?
> I am aware of the "Supported PC Hardware" page, of course, however, I would
> appreciate your personal experience.
>
> Thanks, best regards,
> ++pac
>

On my side, I use WD Green Caviar 1.5TB HDD although I do not recommend
them for multiple reasons (they report 512B physical blocks size
instead of 4k, they fail or slow down a lot when copying a full disk to
another one, at once).

Nicolas

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[erik quanstrom]

> Hi, folks,
>
> I am about to buy an internal HD for my native Plan9 box.
> I need 2TB or more, can anyone recommend me a model that is tested to work?
> Native, not p9p.

i'm not going to recommend any drives.  but i haven't
heard any complaints about segate, western digital or
hitachi *enterprise* drives in a while.  this doesn't mean
other drives aren't good.  i just know nothing about 'em.

here are some example of drives i might look at were i
looking for one
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148825
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236352

it's important to match the product code.  one letter difference in
WD2000FYYZ and you might have a bad drive.  also the
"video" drives really are special purpose drives.

> On my side, I use WD Green Caviar 1.5TB HDD although I do not recommend
> them for multiple reasons (they report 512B physical blocks size
> instead of 4k, they fail or slow down a lot when copying a full disk to
> another one, at once).

4k drives only work in 9atom.  and they're not recommended
as a boot drive.

i've found it hard to tell, even reading the data sheets if a drive
is 512 or 4k.  but many drives have the lba number on the sticker.  and
for example 3907029168 corresponds to 512-byte sectors, 2T.

	3907029168*512/1000^4 = 2.0

- erik

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[Nicolas Bercher]

On 20/02/2013 15:04, erik quanstrom wrote:
> 4k drives only work in 9atom.  and they're not recommended
> as a boot drive.

Do you mean 4k drives that reports 4k block size or 4k drives that
report 512B?


> i've found it hard to tell, even reading the data sheets if a drive
> is 512 or 4k.  but many drives have the lba number on the sticker.  and
> for example 3907029168 corresponds to 512-byte sectors, 2T.
>
> 	3907029168*512/1000^4 = 2.0
>
> - erik

My WD hdd hosts a "Plan 9 from Bell Labs" from Bell Labs, it is a
WDC WD15EARS-00Z.  I'm 99% sure* it is a 4k hdd that reports 512B block
sizes.  And when I installed the system, I did all the partitioning by
hand to ensure alignment for every Plan 9 partition.  It was quite a
pain.

I didn't take a look seriously to the sticker, I will next time the
box will be opened.


Nicolas

--
* If I remember well, I did some tests with misaligned partitions
under Linux, R/W operations were so slow...!  To me, it's hard to be
sure whether it's a 512B or 4kB hdd without performing some tests, like
this.

Re: [9fans] [RQ:] SATA HD 2+ TB native recommendations

[erik quanstrom]

On Wed Feb 20 16:28:48 EST 2013, nbercher@yahoo.fr wrote:
> On 20/02/2013 15:04, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > 4k drives only work in 9atom.  and they're not recommended
> > as a boot drive.
>
> Do you mean 4k drives that reports 4k block size or 4k drives that
> report 512B?

i understand the terminology to be
4k drive		4k physical sectors, 4k logical (reported to os) sectors
512e drive	4k physical sectors, 512b logical sectors

> My WD hdd hosts a "Plan 9 from Bell Labs" from Bell Labs, it is a
> WDC WD15EARS-00Z.  I'm 99% sure* it is a 4k hdd that reports 512B block
> sizes.  And when I installed the system, I did all the partitioning by
> hand to ensure alignment for every Plan 9 partition.  It was quite a
> pain.

that should work just fine.  it can be pretty slow if ever
alignment gets off.  some of these drives have a 1 sector
offset to help older versions of windows, so it's fiddly.

- erik