xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OT] Does the ATA 133 spec. include mechanical details?

To: Danny Cox <danscox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OT] Does the ATA 133 spec. include mechanical details?
From: Greg Freemyer <freemyer-ml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:47:19 -0500
Cc: XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1074032800.12677.6.camel@pip>
References: <1073948203.8061.7.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1074032800.12677.6.camel@pip>
Reply-to: freemyer-ml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 17:26, Danny Cox wrote:
> Greg,
> 
> On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 17:56, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> > But it looks like it requires the power and ATA connector to be at
> > specific physical locations on the drive.  I know that older IDE drives
> > did not have a consistent location for these connectors, so I'm nervous
> > about buying it.
> > 
> > Does anyone know if the ATA 133 spec. requires the connectors be in a
> > specific location, and if so are any of the older drives likely to also
> > use the same physical layout?
> 
>       Sometimes: in the Snap Appliance (nee Quantum) 12 drive NAS box, we had
> drive trays to hold the drives, and provide the slide for the hot-swap
> capability (and a common plug at the back for both power and data).  We
> had at least two kinds: one for IBM DeathStars, and one for Western
> Digital.  We found later that Seagate would also fit the IBM trays.  All
> of these AFAIK, were ATA 100, not 133.
> 
>       I *don't* know about newer drives, but I strongly suspect that the
> "standard" is still what it was: do whatever feels good!
> 
>       Good luck!

Thanks,  I suspected it would be a brand specific thing.

The cost is pretty low, so I have decided to buy one and see if it works
with the Maxtor drives we normally use.

Greg
-- 
Greg Freemyer


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>