On Tuesday 09 December 2008 21:48:25 Bill Davidsen wrote: > David Weisgerber wrote: > > Tested: 4x2742 MB > > > > Run 1 (w/o -no-directio): 5:37 min (for the slowest DVD recorder) > > Mem: 2060284k total, 593336k used, 1466948k free, 15972k buffers > > > > Run 2 (w -no-directio): 4:38 min (for the slowest DVD recorder) > > Mem: 2060284k total, 1877136k used, 183148k free, 224k buffers > > --- > > > > In Run 1 there were several buffer underruns which slowed the DVD > > recorders down. In Run 2 the buffer was always at 100% (except for the > > end of course) :-). > > This seems reasonable, what were the performance numbers for the other > system activity? I'm surprised at the underruns, cdrecord has internal > fifo, and I thought you did, too. With a hacked cdrecord (around a50) > the burn ran almost eight seconds slower, regardless of burn size, and > never dropped below 92% full at the drive, and 70% or so in the fifo.
The underruns are not suprising. I am burning directly from a NFS share via Gigabit Ethernet and the server has a consumer class 1 TB hard drive. Even if I only run with 8x speed, it consumes 4 * 8 * 1.3 MB/s = 41.6 MB/s... The first run needed 337s, this means it had an average data transfer rate of 8.1 MB/s for each burner. This means the 4 burners altogether sucked 32.5 MB/s in average. That's a good value for a consumer class network in my opinion... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]