On Thursday 25 October 2007, Shane Hathaway wrote: > The majority of that time is spent in I/O, not computation. The best > way to accomplish this would be to write the output to a different hard > drive with similar specs, enabling you to use the combined throughput of > both drives.
Actually, you'd get the throughput of the slower of the two, not the combined throughput. (it's a serial operation, not parallel) But, that would still be far better than pounding the same drive and seeking back and forth on it. In fact, filtering it over and then copying it back to the source drive would likely still be much faster than just filtering it all on a single drive. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
