Talk:Tagged Command Queuing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Why Tagged Command Queuing#Comparison of TCQ and NCQ is in need of a complete rewrite
It seems that the author who wrote this section completely mixed up SCSI TCQ and ATA TCQ when writing this section. As far as I know, SCSI TCQ is a well-implemented protocol that does not suffer from any of the problems that ATA TCQ suffers from, while ATA TCQ was a bad protocol because it had to work within the severe limits that appearing as an ISA device to software imposed on it, like requiring that the IDE host bus adapter to act as a third party DMA controller instead of allowing first-party DMA like SCSI and Serial ATA do. I would rewrite this myself if I had access to the standards myself, but I do not have enough money to purchase copies of them. Jesse Viviano 22:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- Isn't ATA command queueing called LCQ for Legacy Command Queueing, instead? I've never heard of TCQ in the context of ATA disks. -- intgr 14:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I have never heard of "LCQ". See http://www.wdc.com/en/library/sata/2579-001097.pdf for an advertisement during the time Western Digital was using ATA TCQ for its Raptor series of hard disks. WD has later switched to NCQ in later revisions of the Raptor because AHCI was becoming the standard method of controlling a good Serial ATA controller, and AHCI did not support TCQ. Jesse Viviano 20:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Why an expert is needed
I rewrote a propaganda section that was full of falsehoods a few months ago, but it needs some verification, references, and style editing. I did not think about using the talk page when I tagged the article. Jesse Viviano 07:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- I am also no expert on SCSI's internal workings, so someone who is familiar with the protocol can fix some errors that I and the apparent expert from 74.245.52.54 who coordinated with me via email could fix. Jesse Viviano 07:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)