Marius Repartitioning can make the access faster. I will look into it and get back to you if I come up anything Rgds Amar At 01:05 02/12/1999 , you wrote: >From: marius de vries <marius@...> > > > >Amar Nagi <amar@...> wrote: > > "Have you tried a RAID Set up ? " > > Amar: thanks for responding. No, I have not, but I need to get *this* >system going, and I know it can do better....... > >It's been suggested that I should repartition my drives so that the >individual drives are not split up into smaller partitions >(currently they are 4 x 4gig each). I will try this when I get a moment. > >Also that I check that I am using the latest Apple drivers. Which I am, >I think. > >Any other ideas anyone? > >Regards > >mdv > >ORIGINAL MESSAGE: > > >>> I've just installed a new LAM system, B+W G3 (400 mhz), 2x888, >ATTO SCSI card, 4 x 16gig cheetah drives in a Glyph Hotswap > >>> chassis. > > >>> Running a similar test to the above, laying out 64 *different* >audio tracks, I am unable to get more than 28 mono tracks (26 > >>> with cycle enabled) playing simultaneously before I get a >"Disc-too-slow-or-fragmented" error message. My 9600-based system > >>> does much better..... > > >>> DAE buffer is set to 2, other buffer settings appear to have >little impact on this problem. > >>> All four Cheetahs are attached to one of the ATTO ports. I know >I'd probably be doing better to split them, but I'm thinking I > >>> should be able to get better performance in this configuration - >I've run 48+ tracks off one drive before - and I'd rather keep > >>> it like this if possible. > > >>> All discs freshly defragmented and checked by Dr Norton.