[HN Gopher] The Dual-Drive IDE Hell
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Dual-Drive IDE Hell
        
       Author : userbinator
       Score  : 44 points
       Date   : 2021-08-26 04:20 UTC (18 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.os2museum.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.os2museum.com)
        
       | timw4mail wrote:
       | I've generally had few issues with IDE hard drives and CDROM
       | drives, from the Pentium era forward. The "fun" has been dealing
       | with hard drive replacements, whether SD card or Compact flash.
        
       | jandrese wrote:
       | Oh yeah. IDE Master/Slave was pure voodoo. With hard drives it
       | usually wasn't too bad, but ATAPI devices (CD-ROMs) were just
       | insane. I saw everything from drives that wouldn't be recognized
       | unless they were slave to a HDD, to drives that refused every
       | configuration except being a slave drive with no master--which
       | isn't supposed to work at all.
       | 
       | Cable select sometimes worked, but I didn't trust it as much as
       | the jumpers. I did try to match the jumpers with the position on
       | the cable just to give myself a better chance of success.
       | 
       | The article is correct that mixing drive brands, or even mixing
       | drive eras was asking for trouble. Another fun aspect is when
       | someone wanted to install more than 4 drives and had to use one
       | of the ISA (later PCI) PATA cards. Those cards _never_ supported
       | ATAPI devices in my experience, so there were some machines that
       | booted off of a HDD hanging off of an ISA card so the 4 burners
       | could be on the system controller.
       | 
       | And don't even get me started on the godforsaken CMD640 that
       | every damn manufacturer used for years.
        
         | citrin_ru wrote:
         | Maybe I started to use computers too late (my 1st HDD supported
         | UDMA/33 or 66 AFAIR), but I don't remember any problems with
         | master/slave. Just set jumpers and it works.
        
           | codezero wrote:
           | Yeah, I am not doubting the author at all, but I built a lot
           | of computers for myself and others in the 90s, and maybe I
           | just don't remember, or maybe I always had two cables, one
           | for each drive, but I distinctly remember setting jumpers and
           | it just worked. That said, I was using mostly Linux,
           | sometimes Windows, so maybe this was an OS/2 thing?
           | 
           | Something I do remember though, was having to get the blocks,
           | cylinders, etc... manually when partitioning/formatting
           | disks.
           | 
           | I guess I got lucky with the drives I used, which back then
           | would have mostly been Western Digital with a splash of
           | Seagate, maybe because I didn't typically mix vendors in an
           | initial build I just didn't run into these issues.
        
         | throw0101a wrote:
         | I found that, back in the day, simply buying Plextors was the
         | simplest solution. For best results when burning, you'd want
         | the optical drive to be the master device on the secondary IDE
         | bus.
         | 
         | Of course IDE only allowed two devices on a bus, with generally
         | only two buses. If you wanted more you had to go with
         | (parallel) SCSI, which allowed up to 8 IDs (one taken up by the
         | controller) with the 8-bit bus, and up to 16 IDs on the 16-bit
         | controller:
         | 
         | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCSI_high_byte_termination
         | 
         | Just don't forget to put the properly-ohmed termination at the
         | correct location on the cable.
         | 
         | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_SCSI
         | 
         | There was folklore that said three terminations were needed to
         | get things to work: two electrical, one on each end of the
         | cable; and one termination of a rooster at midnight around five
         | black candles.
        
           | brudgers wrote:
           | I could be mistaken, but I seem to remember adding additional
           | drives using ISA IDE controller cards.
        
         | Slartie wrote:
         | > so the 4 burners could be on the system controller
         | 
         | Oh those were the days, in which poor students financed their
         | high-end IT equipment by selling "backup copies" of popular
         | music albums, games and other software products on the school
         | yard to their peers...
        
         | aidenn0 wrote:
         | By the time ATAPI was around (instead of proprietary CD-ROMs),
         | all of my issues with 2 drives had gone away. You had to jumper
         | them right (cable-select was always hit-or-miss for me, right
         | up until SATA), but if you did that they worked just fine for
         | me.
        
       | vondur wrote:
       | IDE Drives seemed plenty simple to me, coming from mostly using
       | SCSI drives during that time.
        
       | theandrewbailey wrote:
       | I built a 2000-era PC a few years ago, and it brought back
       | memories of how much I hated using/configuring IDE back in the
       | day. I've had IDE drives become flaky for no obvious reason.
       | 
       | SATA is such an advancement. For me, the only bad part about it
       | is the mechanics of the cable itself (comes out too easy or too
       | hard).
        
       | UI_at_80x24 wrote:
       | I was building PCs during this time. One thing I didn't see
       | mentioned in TFA was that the 'master' (drive 0) MUST be located
       | at the end of the cable. The 'slave' had to be in the middle.
       | 
       | The jumpers were easy to figure out and not as complicated as the
       | author makes out. Contrary to the experience that na85 had;
       | "Cable Select" _never_ worked for me.
       | 
       | Yes it was a time of chaos and frustration, but I learned more in
       | that period then I did since then. Hard core hardware lessons.
       | 
       | Note: most IRQ jumpers and motherboard jumpers were the same size
       | as the drive jumpers. I was never at a loss for jumpers, but I
       | did manage to lose them a lot.
        
         | Neil44 wrote:
         | Same, cable select was not worth messing with as it so rarely
         | worked. Just set master/slave and be done with it. I agree with
         | the other poster also that said CDROMS were the worst full
         | stop.
        
         | handrous wrote:
         | > The jumpers were easy to figure out and not as complicated as
         | the author makes out. Contrary to the experience that na85 had;
         | "Cable Select" _never_ worked for me.
         | 
         | I think every drive I encountered that was manufactured after
         | the early 90s either had a printed diagram for the jumpers
         | somewhere on it, or else had labels molded right in to the
         | plastic case around the pins themselves. Only time it was hard,
         | back when I used to tinker with computers a lot, was when I'd
         | be messing with a junked 286 or something. Further, by the late
         | 90s IIRC drives had begun to converge on a standard jumper
         | layout.
        
       | chaoticmass wrote:
       | Used to work in a computer store in the early 2000's and 99% of
       | the time when someone came in to return an IDE drive it was due
       | to this problem.
        
       | lloydatkinson wrote:
       | Getting flashbacks. I'm glad SATA is a single device per
       | cable/socket.
        
       | AtlasBarfed wrote:
       | Does anyone chain SATAs in their home PC builds? Like IDEs it's
       | been sold as a feature to SATA since the inception, but I always
       | assumed that it was like IDE: a part of the protocol no SATA chip
       | provider bothered to debug, or even implement.
       | 
       | I think there were raid/NAS boxes that actually did it...
        
         | gerdesj wrote:
         | This is all from memory, so treat with caution.
         | 
         | The S in SATA is serial. The older IDE jobs are PATA -
         | parallel. Two PATA drive share the available bandwidth (for
         | want of a better word) and multiple SATAs have all the
         | bandwidth available simultaneously to each device.
         | 
         | Copying from one PATA disk to another on the same bus is
         | horrible - in out, in out shake it all about at a few 10s of
         | MBs-1. Copying from one SATA to another runs at full speed.
         | 
         | For real speed you need SSD and hardware RAID with whopping
         | caches and a price to match. For huge storage, reliability and
         | a fairly eye watering price, why not use SSD to cache fast SAS
         | 2.5" spinning rust with a decent hardware RAID. Oh I've just
         | started to specify a SAN/NAS!
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | SAS allows "breakouts" and I think they may have updated SATA
           | to allow something similar.
        
             | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
             | SATA always supported port multipliers. Backblaze used them
             | in the early days for their storage pods.
        
       | na85 wrote:
       | By the time I started building gaming PCs in the 90s, many drives
       | had Cable Select settings on the jumper. It pretty much "just
       | worked" for me.
        
       | myself248 wrote:
       | That is so bizarre, I built and tinkered with way too many
       | machines in that era, and I only remember one combination that
       | didn't work, two early ATAPI CDROMs on the same chain. Everything
       | else, just get the jumpers right and it was good to go.
       | 
       | This was mostly in the era of ISA and then VLB "Super-I/O" cards,
       | so maybe mobos with integrated IDE are pickier?
        
       | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
       | > But there are also drives which cleverly combined the two
       | standards for 2.54mm pitch and 0.5mm pins
       | 
       | These would be 2.5mm pitch which is close enough to be semi-
       | interoperable with 0.1".
        
       | deckard1 wrote:
       | This definitely isn't my recollection of the '90s. IDE just
       | worked. Yes, you had to get the cable and jumpers correct. But it
       | wasn't rocket science. It pales in comparison to the headache of
       | MFM. I remember having to use the DOS DEBUG.COM and communicate
       | directly with the controller card to get a low-level format. And
       | two ribbon cables per drive. I had two MFM drives in an XT. Lord.
       | Ribbon cables every goddamn where.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-26 23:00 UTC)