Message-Id: <3.0.16.19910215201006.2ac75468@tellus.swip.net>
X-Sender: mt58779 AT tellus DOT swip DOT net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 Demo (16)
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
From: Bernie <bernie AT mbox302 DOT swipnet DOT se>
Subject: Re: prob audio CD on 2nd CD-ROM with NWCDEX
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 07:46:09 +0100
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

Utz wrote:
>I mentioned to put the fast HDD and the CDRW to the onboard EIDE 
>controller which is _first_ in system and to cable the slow HDD 
>and the CDROM to the on board IDE channel. 
>I do not see alternatives.
>I am aware that usage of HDD and CDRW at the same cable is often 
>said to be a risk. (Not for SCSI.) But bandwith together with 
>hardware caches IMHO should give lower risk. 

In my experience setting it up like this highly increases your speed. First
off you must somehow weight together the speed of the unit and the time you
use it (for instance a fast HD that you rarely use isn't as important).
When you have done this you put it like this:

1st IDE channel master - highest weight (your primary HD)
2nd IDE channel master - second (secondary HD or CD/CD-R)
1st IDE channel slave - third
2nd IDE channel slave - fourth

I don't think there's much to gain between choosing which IDE channel
you're going to use, but the basic is rather easy anyway. Of course if you
seldom transfer files (and then many and big) between the drives this
doesn't matter (much).
And as I've mentioned earlier, UDMA will make this diffrent (you should put
a UDMA 100 drive on a UDMA 100 channel).
As I've also mentioned I don't believe that there's any speed diffrence
between the two IDE channels (not in the way they are supposed to work
anyway).
//Bernie