Home > Ask the Storage Technology Experts > Questions & Answers > Using IDE architecture
Ask The Storage Expert: Questions & Answers
EMAIL THIS

Using IDE architecture

Norbert Haag EXPERT RESPONSE FROM: Norbert Haag

Pose a Question
Other Storage Categories
Meet all Storage Experts
Become an Expert for this site
>
QUESTION POSED ON: 08 October 2003
In a storage box is an IDE architecture slower then FCAL performance?


Digg This!    StumbleUpon Toolbar StumbleUpon    Bookmark with Delicious Del.icio.us   


RELATED RESOURCES
2020software.com, trial software downloads for accounting software, ERP software, CRM software and business software systems
Search Bitpipe.com for the latest white papers and business webcasts
Whatis.com, the online computer dictionary


If we compare IDE to FCAL it doesn't make any difference whether the storage is physically in a box or spread over several yards, so the box itself has no implication on the performance.

First let me clarify what IDE stands for. IDE is the abbreviation for "Integrated Drive Electronics" and is the drive part that matches ATA on the controller side. FC-AL means "fibre channel arbitrated loop" and is a way of interconnecting devices in a fibre channel environment.

That means we must look at the ATA/IDE pair and the fibre channel side. ATA/IDE was developed with the goal of reducing costs. It's meant to be a low-cost, moderate performance interface primarily used in desktop PC's. For this reason, ATA/IDE doesn't perform very well when it comes to high throughput and multi I/O from an architectural point of view. (High throughput and multi I/O certainly weren't objectives for the development of ATA/IDE).

On a single drive ATA/IDE can handle a throughput of up to 16.6 Mbps. FCAL on the other side goes up to 100 Mbps. ATA/IDE does not support overlapping operations and is not well suited for high throughput environments with many disks. FCAL Hubs (I/O controllers) on the other side are capable of multi I/0 and the data between controller and devices is transferred with the 100 Mbps technology. The only disadvantage of FCAL compared to a fabric is the FCAL works similar to Token Ring Networks, where only two devices can exchange data at the same time (that is one controller/device connection at a time). But FCAL is well above the speed of ATA/IDE and the performance gain is greater when more disks are connected in an array. A practical maximum for disks in an FC-AL is around 15-25.

I would suppose therefore that an ATA/IDE box with the same amount of disks is remarkably slower than a FC-AL attached architecture.




Search and Browse the Expert Answer Center
Search and browse more than 25,000 question and answer pairs from more than 250 TechTarget industry experts.
Browse our Expert Advice



Search for Data Management Tools and Tiered Storage Reseller Solutions
TechTarget Storage Media
Storage Magazine View this month\\'s issue and subscribe today.
Storage Decisions Apply online for free conference admission.
SearchStorage.com
HomeNewsMagazineTopicsLearningMultimediaWhite PapersBlogsEventsAbout Us

About Us  |  Contact Us  |  For Advertisers  |  For Business Partners  |  Site Index  |  RSS
TechTarget provides technology professionals with the information they need to perform their jobs - from developing strategy, to making cost-effective purchase decisions and managing their organizations' technology projects - with its network of technology-specific websites, events and online magazines.

TechTarget Corporate Web Site  |  Media Kits  |  Site Map




All Rights Reserved, Copyright 2000 - 2009, TechTarget | Read our Privacy Policy
  TechTarget - The IT Media ROI Experts