Message from discussion Unipod question

Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!dedekind.zen.co.uk!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!prichard.zen.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn.hardware
From: Ollie Clark <use...@ollieclark.com>
Subject: Re: Unipod question
References: <5073fe0a97dave@davenoise.co.uk>
Reply-To: use...@ollieclark.com
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.9p1 (Linux)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <slrnh4mu93.4r9.usenet@greedy.zen175545>
Date: 01 Jul 2009 14:56:35 GMT
Lines: 12
Organization: Zen Internet
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9a445dee.news.zen.co.uk
X-Trace: DXC=[2:QRkDI7ZlUG:6?LFGYHh0g@SS;SF6ngR9OH0:RnENd]9[RWeTJT\jSM4aJIa0k3e\k4<j?4dIOi
X-Complaints-To: abuse@zen.co.uk

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> I have two HDs and two CDs - one a writer. Does it matter how they are
> arranged on the Unipod? Ie both HDs on one circuit or share each with a
> CD? And which should be master or slave?

AIUI and IIRC, you should try to have devices that you're going to be 
copying data between on different channels (primary or secondary). So,
if you write a lot of CDs from one HD to your writer, have the HD on 
primary and the writer on secondary.

Other than that, I don't think it matters much. I tend to have HDs as 
master and optical drives as slave if I've got both on one channel.