Talk:Tagged Command Queuing

Why Tagged Command Queuing 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)

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)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. ErikHaugen (talk &#124; contribs) 07:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Tagged Command Queuing → Tagged command queuing –

Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. In addition, WP:MOSCAPS says that a compound item should not be upper-cased just because it is abbreviated with caps. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony  (talk)  14:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Meh Would make sense if used as a generic term (although, then shouldn't it be "tagged command-queuing"?). Seems to be written using capitals significantly more often though, including in sources used in the articles (e.g. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/command-queuing-turbo-charge-sata,922-2.html). —Ruud 22:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tagged Command Queuing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/66naiPrPb?url=http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/sam3/sam3r14.pdf to http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/sam3/sam3r14.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:02, 12 January 2018 (UTC)