On Mon, 04 Oct 1999, you wrote:
> Tom Brinkman wrote:
> > 
> > /dev/hdb:  [8.4g WD Caviar, Mdk 6.0 and swap are on the first 3g's.
> >  Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  1.01 seconds =126.73 MB/sec
> >  Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 12.62 seconds = 5.07 MB/sec

Steve:
> Run:  hdparm -m16 -c1 -u1 -d1 -k1 -a128 /dev/hdb
> 
> If it goes without error, put it at the end of /etc/rc.d/rc.local.
> 
> The command will setup 16 sectors for multi-sector transfer, turn on
> 32bit interface support, turn on interrupt masking (will allow other
> interrupts to be serviced while hard drive is busy), turn on DMA
> transfers, set the drive to keep these settings over a reset and set
> filesystem readahead to 128 sectors.
> 
> After running this, rerun the hdparm -tT a few times to see what the new
> rates are.  If they still seem low, tweak the -m and -a values.

> -- 
> Steve Philp
> Network Administrator
> Advance Packaging Corporation
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]


    I used Steve's suggestion, only modified by a note I found in
'info hdparm' for the '-m' setting:
             "Western Digital
              recommends lower settings of 4  to  8  on  many  of
              their  drives,  due  tiny  (32kB) drive buffers and
              non-optimized buffering algorithms."

 [note:  I believe this rings true from what I hear from o/c'rs
         for IBM HDD's also, Tom]

 After dozens of combinations of -m and -a values, my 8.4 WD hdb
 scored the highest and most consistently with 
        hdparm -m4 -c1 -u1 -d1 -k1 -a128 /dev/hdb

now it benches:  hdparm -tT
/dev/hdb:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  0.94 seconds =136.17 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  6.04 seconds =10.60 MB/sec

       That's about a 5% increase in buffer reads, but a whopping
209% increase in disk reads.  It's very much apparent in how fast
programs like StarOffice and Netscape load... _twice as fast_ than
before Steve's suggested HDD optimization.

        Thank's again Steve.  What else ya got??  ;-)
-- 
..      Tom Brinkman    [EMAIL PROTECTED]                      .
                        

Reply via email to