SUMMARY: Fujitsu M2266SA

From: Dan Kelley (dank@teleng.telxon.com)
Date: Thu Jul 23 1992 - 07:42:39 CDT


Original post:
> I have a 1.3G Fujitsu M2266SA SCSI disk and do not think that the format.dat
> entry I have is correct. I believe that I am losing too much in overhead.
> The entry I have is the following:
>
> disk_type = "Fujitsu M2266SA" \
> : ctlr = MD21 : fmt_time = 2 \
> : ncyl = 1642 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1644 : nhead = 15 : nsect = 85 \
> : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 46635
>
> partition = "Fujitsu M2266SA" \
> : disk = "Fujitsu M2266SA" : ctlr = MD21 \
> : a = 0, 31875 : b = 25, 38250 : c = 0, 2093550 : g = 55, 2023425
>
> I made one partition on sd0a using the same number listed in c above (i.e.
> 2093550). This give me a df listing of kbytes available as 983309. These
> numbers say that I am losing about 24% of the disk in overhead which is
> too much because I am getting an overhead count of about 13% with each of
> the other disks on the system (which is a 4/280). I believe that the
> format.dat numbers are wrong. This does not surprise me because we bought a
> Seagate WREN IX from the same VAR and got the wrong format.dat entry for
> this also (thanks to someone here, I got the right numbers). Ok, enough
> verbage...
> Question:
> 1. Is the entry in format.dat correct?
> 2. Is the Fujitsu M2266SA a 1.3G disk?
> 3. Side note: Is the Seagate WREN IX a 2.0G disk?
>
> Can anyone help?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Dan...
>
> --
> Dan Kelley () ===== ===== = = = //// = =
> () = === = = ////// == =
> dkell@telxon.com () = ===== ===== = ////// = == Corp.
> (216)-867-3700 x3512 () //// Akron, OH

Well, well. There were about as many differences as there were responses.

1. Suggestions for format.dat entry:

        => From Mike Raffety:
        disk_type = "Fujitsu M2266SA-512" \
                : ctlr = MD21 : fmt_time = 4 \
                : trks_zone = 15 : asect = 3 \
                : pcyl = 1658 : ncyl = 1652 : acyl = 2 \
                : nhead = 15 : nsect = 85 \
                : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50910

        => From Luis Vallejo:
        The disk drive physical characterintis are :
        Cylinders Heads Sectors Capacity
        ===========================================

        1658 15 85 1079.1 MB

        Sun recomends to reserve 6 cylinders and 2 alternated so you may want
        to try this:

        Cyl Alt/Cyl Heads Sect/Track
        =======================================

        1648 2 15 85

        This will increase the size of the drive.

        The difference is from 2093550 to 2101200 wich is about 35 Mb

        => From nancy@aspiring.unh.edu:
        ncyl=1648
        c = 0, 2101200

        => From Rafi Sadowsky:
        ncyl=1656:pcyl=165

        => From lees@cps.msu.edu:`
        disk_type = "FUJITSU-M2266SA" \
                : ctlr = MD21 \
                : trks_zone = 15 : asect = 3 : atrks = 30 \
                : ncyl = 1703 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1705 : nhead = 15 \
                : nsect = 82 : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 50910
        #
        partition = "FUJITSU-M2266SA" \
                : disk = "FUJITSU-M2266SA" : ctlr = MD21 \
                : c = 0, 2094690

        This is what "df" shows for four of them on this system:

        /dev/sd1c 983983 685041 200544 77% /home/pixel/u41
        /dev/sd4c 983983 752528 133057 85% /home/pixel/u42
        /dev/sd5c 983983 768351 117234 87% /home/pixel/u43
        /dev/sd6c 983983 697762 187823 79% /home/pixel/u44

        => From Marc Phillips:
        disk_type = "Fujitsu M2266S" \
                : ctlr = SCSI : fmt_time = 4 \
                : cache = 0x11 \
                : ncyl = 1642 : acyl = 2 : pcyl = 1644 : nhead = 15 \
                : nsect = 85 : rpm = 3600 : bpt = 43520

        partition = "Fujitsu M2266S" \
                : disk = "Fujitsu M2266S" : ctlr = SCSI \
                : c = 0, 2093550

        => From Jim Davis:
        I have a number of these disks; I used 1705 for the number of physical
        cylinders, with 2 alternates; 15 heads, and 82 for nsect. But
        overall it doesn't seem to make much difference, because I get 983983
        kbytes for the disk. The "Technical Handbook" for these drives lists
        this drive as 1079.1 MB (with 512 byte blocks), so 1.3 Gig is probably
        a bit high and the 983309 KB after formatting and building the
        filesystems sounds about right.

2. Size of Fujitsu:
        2 replys agreed that it is 1.3G unformatted
        4 replys said that the size is 1.2G unformatted
        4 replys said that the size is 1.079G unformatted (1 added that
        it formats to 1.05G)

3. Size of Seagate WREN IX:
        Nobody knows. I guess the disk is too new.

I don't know if I am any better off :-) but thanks to the following for
their input:

Rafi Sadowsky <rafi@tavor.openu.ac.il>
fergus@lincoln.gpsemi.com
bit!jayl@ogicse (Jay Lessert)
trdlnk!mike@uunet.UU.NET (Michael Sullivan)
lees@cps.msu.edu
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger)
phillips@athena.Qualcomm.COM (Marc Phillips)
Christopher Davis <ckd@eff.org>
jdavis@noao.edu (Jim Davis)
Larry Chin <larry@cch.com>
nancy@aspiring.unh.edu
polaris1!support!lv@uunet.UU.NET (Luis Vallejo)
Mike Raffety <miker@sbcoc.com>

Dan...

-- 
       Dan Kelley         ()   ===== ===== =   = =    ////  =  =
                          ()     =   ===   =    =   //////  == =
     dkell@telxon.com     ()     =   ===== ===== =  //////  = ==   Corp.
   (216)-867-3700 x3512   ()                        ////           Akron, OH



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:06:45 CDT