RE: Symmetric vs Asymmetric

["VonStamwitz, Paul" <paulv@corp.adaptec.com>]

In general I agree with the asymmetric model.

David Robinson wrote:
> 
> That's not a bug, that's a feature! Having the asymmetric degenerate
> into symmetric with just one connection is a good thing.  For starters
> it is easier to implement initially or in cheap devices and doesn't
> have the baggage that a true symmetric design would require
> but is not needed with one connection. I would oppose mandating
> two connections minimum, if flow control is a problem then the defacto
> configuration will be two connections, but lets not require it.
> 

I agree with David. I oppose a two connection minimum.

> Personally I would still prefer one connection per LUN, but the
> proposed asymmetric model is a good compromise. You could
> still deploy an implementation with a connection per LUN and not
> have any significant unnecessary baggage. Not true of the symmetric
> model.
> 

One connection per LUN alleviates commands being flow controlled by large
transfers of data.

Paul