Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 04:28, Miark wrote: > On 12 Aug 2003 09:06:32 +1000, Stephen Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 02:55, ed tharp wrote: > > > > > not 'really' true, As I recall, NTFS has been updated (in order to > > > retain incompatibility)a couple of times, NTFS on XP is not exactly the > > > same critter as NTFS on NT3.5 > > > > It still sucks nonetheless. > > Too bad they're (M$) not smart enough to make use of say, ReiserFS... > > They stick with NTFS for the same reason they use a closed, proprietary > file format for the office docs: to force users to use their OS and > software. If they used Reiser, other OSes (including that dreaded > "Linux") would be able to read/write to them. It'll be a cold day in > hell when that happens. > > Miark Last time I experienced "A Cold Day in Hell" I got a flat tire on my Chevy 1969 Chevelle SS and had to stay there most of the day (drinking a lot as well, of course) Hell, Michigan -- Sat Aug 16 07:35:01 EST 2003 07:35:01 up 12 days, 11:23, 3 users, load average: 1.60, 1.99, 1.86 - |____ | illawarra computer services| | /-oo /| |'-. | http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' | stephen kuhn | | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * Everyone seems so impatient and angry these days. I think it's because so many people use Windows at work -- do you think you'd be Politeness Man after working on Windows 8 hrs. or more? -- Chip Atkinson Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On 12 Aug 2003 09:06:32 +1000, Stephen Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 02:55, ed tharp wrote: > > > not 'really' true, As I recall, NTFS has been updated (in order to > > retain incompatibility)a couple of times, NTFS on XP is not exactly the > > same critter as NTFS on NT3.5 > > It still sucks nonetheless. > Too bad they're (M$) not smart enough to make use of say, ReiserFS... They stick with NTFS for the same reason they use a closed, proprietary file format for the office docs: to force users to use their OS and software. If they used Reiser, other OSes (including that dreaded "Linux") would be able to read/write to them. It'll be a cold day in hell when that happens. Miark Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sunday 10 Aug 2003 3:26 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> [root /tom] $ hdparm -tT /dev/hd[ab]
>
> /dev/hda: (ata/133, udma6)
===
underlined data is not shown for me.
I get only
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lvgandhi]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hdb
/dev/hdb:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.42 seconds = 90.14 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.55 seconds = 41.29 MB/sec
I have hda and hdb hard disks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lvgandhi]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.42 seconds = 90.14 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.13 seconds = 30.05 MB/sec
What is the significance of first indicator and second indicator.
How can I increase first parameter?
other info given below.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lvgandhi]# hdparm -i /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Model=ST320413A, FwRev=3.39, SerialNo=6ED1JBLC
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs RotSpdTol>.5% }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=0
BuffType=unknown, BuffSize=512kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=39102336
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:240,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: device does not report version: 1 2 3 4
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lvgandhi]# hdparm -i /dev/hdb
/dev/hdb:
Model=SAMSUNG SP4002H, FwRev=QU100-60, SerialNo=0411J1FT811301
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=34902, SectSize=554, ECCbytes=4
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=2048kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=78242976
IORDY=yes, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: ATA/ATAPI-6 T13 1410D revision 1: 1 2 3 4 5 6
--
L.V.Gandhi
203, Soundaryalahari Apartments, Lawsons Bay colony, Visakhapatnam, 530017
MECON, 5th Floor, RTC Complex, Visakhapatnam AP 530020 INDIA
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:20, Dennis Myers wrote: > Stephen, do you not need to put the parameters in /etc/rc.d/rc.local or > somewhere like that to get the hd set on each boot up? Long time back I seem > to recall having to do that on one of my older machines but forgot about it > till this thread popped up. /etc/sysconfig/harddisks -- Mon Aug 11 10:30:00 EST 2003 10:30:00 up 7 days, 14:18, 1 user, load average: 2.38, 2.40, 2.25 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * If it's working, the diagnostics say it's fine. If it's not working, the diagnostics say it's fine. - A proposed addition to rules for realtime programming Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sun, 2003-08-10 at 08:12, Stephen Kuhn wrote: > On Sun, 2003-08-10 at 21:38, Anarky wrote: > > hi everybody ... me new ... I just had a very embarassing moment > > today. A friend came by with his hdd .. and I was copying about 1Gb of > > data from one hdd to another. My linux preaching was going pretty well > > .. and he was pretty much willing to give it a try too ... > > > In the case of slapping hard drives into your machine and then copying > data to them, it's best to get to know HDPARM quite well, and how to > tweak drive settings with it. > > After slapping the drive in your boxen and getting linux up and running > and recognising the drive, you're going to want to force some params on > it in order to get some better throughput - much better than what you > experienced today. > > I honestly suggest reading very carefully through the HDPARM man pages, > but then again, I know about RTFM and how often we choose not to do > that... > > So, with that said, here are some settings that I've found work about > right for every drive I slap into a system here (for basically the same > thing): > > hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -c3 -m16 -A1 -W1 /dev/hdX > > (where X is the letter of the device) i might have missed how full the drives are, or if (since fat32) they have been defragged in some time. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Anarky wrote: John Richard Smith wrote: Anarky wrote: you know ... turns out this slowdown only happens when copying from fat32 to fat32 ... when copying from fat32 to linux partition it's constantly at about 9mb/second. Still, acording to your huge test results my hdds might be somehow missconfigured, or is Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.87 seconds = 34.22 MB/sec normal for a 7200 rpm 20Gb Ibm drive? My 40 g Maxtor gives, hdparm -tT /dev/hda Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.56 seconds =228.57 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.67 seconds = 38.32 MB/sec I think my main is exactly that 40gb Maxtor .. and it only gives 150mb/sec! what could be wrong? I'm not really the one to ask, but, maybe you don't have DMA set, both in linux and in bios ? I would check in bios that DMA is enabled, as charles Edwards has remorslessly said to me, start with bios then think about the OS. Also do you have a spindle speed of 7200, do you have your OS on the fastest portion of the hard drive disc. remember very large hard drives have 2 spinning discs, so the fastest portion on the discs is not going to be in the middle, though probably not so in your case. Don't know though. just a few suggestions John John -- John Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Stephen Kuhn wrote: On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:24, Anarky wrote: you know ... turns out this slowdown only happens when copying from fat32 to fat32 ... when copying from fat32 to linux partition it's constantly at about 9mb/second. Still, acording to your huge test results my hdds might be somehow missconfigured, or is Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.87 seconds = 34.22 MB/sec normal for a 7200 rpm 20Gb Ibm drive? I think that part of the problem IS in the fact that you're copying FAT32 to FAT32 - what happens when you copy it to ext3 or ReiserFS and then to FAT32? like I said in another mail if I copy fat32 to linux partition (don't know what kind exactly, the default installed with mdk 9.1) the speed is constantly fast. But that is one side of it: that copy speed & dropdown. As I understand these tests (hdparm -tT ) don't have anything to do with the partition type (actually at least on hda I've got like 7 or 8 partitions) ... so maybe there's a problem in general in how my linux works with my hdds? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 21:42, John Richard Smith wrote:
My 40 g Maxtor gives,
hdparm -tT /dev/hda
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.56 seconds =228.57 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.67 seconds = 38.32 MB/sec
John
...show off...(g)
No, Honestly, is that good bad or indifferent,
hdparm -i /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Model=MAXTOR 6L040J2, FwRev=AR1.0400, SerialNo=662134540297
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=32256, SectSize=21298, ECCbytes=4
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=1818kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=4047/16/255, CurSects=16511760, LBA=yes, LBAsects=78177792
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5 udma6
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: ATA/ATAPI-5 T13 1321D revision 1: 1 2 3 4 5
I should put hdparm -tT /dev/hd in /etc/sysconfig/harddisks?
me thinks,
John
--
John Richard Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 07:42, John Richard Smith wrote: > > > > > My 40 g Maxtor gives, > hdparm -tT /dev/hda > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.56 seconds =228.57 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.67 seconds = 38.32 MB/sec > > John WD 120 gb:[EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda /dev/hda: Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.19 seconds =673.68 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.45 seconds = 44.14 MB/sec No idea if thats normal or good or bad.. i dunno what i'm looking for..so thought i'd throw this in & ask. :) I ran the test 3 times too... thats the last reading. -- Femme On MDK 9.1, more or less 24/7...cept for gaming. Finally. :D Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 19:52, Anarky wrote: > Stephen Kuhn wrote: > > >On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:14, Anarky wrote: > > > > > > > >>so what can I do (without buying new hardware or moving back to > >>windows) ? > >>There's got to be soemthing ... and btw, how do I reset to what it was > >>before/default? will it reset after reboot? It's this speed drop thing > >>that's weird: it starts copying with 9Mb per sec .. but quickly drops to > >>3,2,1 Mb/sec (quickly as in in 30 seconds). > >> > >> > > > >Well, something is definitely up with that - do you have both HD's on > >the same cable? Does your motherboard support ATA133/ATA100? > > > > > I don't trully know ... but it can't be something hardware related, > because as I said if I reboot to windows I get a constant fast copy Then I'd tend to reckon it's the FAT32 to FAT32 translation as the files have to be translated FROM one filesystem to the TARGET filesystem; if the SOURCE wasn't a FAT32 partition, I'll bet the transfer would be much quicker... Better yet, why not do a transfer using like XDOS or WINE? -- Mon Aug 11 20:05:00 EST 2003 20:05:00 up 7 days, 23:53, 1 user, load average: 1.88, 1.84, 1.89 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * "Help Mr. Wizard!" -- Tennessee Tuxedo Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Monday 11 Aug 2003 6:15 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote: Well, I'm reading this thread and seein the suggestions to use hdparm parameters in rc.local or harddisks with some wonderment. With Mandrake 9.x, you shouldn't need to configure any hdparm parameters. Mandrake does it automatically unless it detects known so, the idea is that I should leave my hdparm alone? And, well, following sugestions here I did a coulpe of commands ... did they remain active even after a reboot? and if so: how do I set them back? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Tom Brinkman wrote: On Monday August 11 2003 02:21 pm, John Richard Smith wrote: yes, I think I experienced this when we went through my own configuration with you a while back, and the conclusion I came to was that overdoing anything the makers recomend is a zero sum game to the degree to which you overclock, you get nothing for nothing, so I went back to makers recommended settings, and since I am not into gaming , blow it all. Not so fast partner ;> I was referring to HDD performance. Somethin cpu/cache/ram intensive scales linearly up with overclocking. A glibc src.rpm or kernel 'make bzImage', 'make modules' compile for examples. Most all benchmarks. OTOH, I've always overclocked mostly like mountain climbers say, "just 'cause its there". Besides, now'adays if your hardware isn't overclockable, you probly should'na bought it to begin with ;) If it isn't clockable, it probly won't run all that well at the specs the 'makers' set out. Dell is a good example ;> I take your point entirely. John -- John Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
John Richard Smith wrote: Anarky wrote: you know ... turns out this slowdown only happens when copying from fat32 to fat32 ... when copying from fat32 to linux partition it's constantly at about 9mb/second. Still, acording to your huge test results my hdds might be somehow missconfigured, or is Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.87 seconds = 34.22 MB/sec normal for a 7200 rpm 20Gb Ibm drive? My 40 g Maxtor gives, hdparm -tT /dev/hda Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.56 seconds =228.57 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.67 seconds = 38.32 MB/sec I think my main is exactly that 40gb Maxtor .. and it only gives 150mb/sec! what could be wrong? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 21:42, John Richard Smith wrote: > My 40 g Maxtor gives, > hdparm -tT /dev/hda > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.56 seconds =228.57 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.67 seconds = 38.32 MB/sec > > John ...show off...(g) -- Mon Aug 11 21:29:59 EST 2003 21:30:00 up 8 days, 1:18, 1 user, load average: 2.07, 1.83, 1.77 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * Every Solidarity center had piles and piles of paper ... everyone was eating paper and a policeman was at the door. Now all you have to do is bend a disk. -- A member of the outlawed Polish trade union, Solidarity, commenting on the benefits of using computers in support of their movement. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Tuesday August 12 2003 02:44 am, Anarky wrote: > >On Monday 11 Aug 2003 6:15 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote: > >>Well, I'm reading this thread and seein the suggestions to > >> use hdparm parameters in rc.local or harddisks with some > >> wonderment. With Mandrake 9.x, you shouldn't need to configure > >> any hdparm parameters. Mandrake does it automatically unless > >> it detects known > > so, the idea is that I should leave my hdparm alone? And, > well, following sugestions here I did a coulpe of commands ... > did they remain active even after a reboot? and if so: how do I > set them back? No, they don't remain active unless you put 'em in rc.local. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 06:14, Stephen Kuhn wrote: > On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 19:56, Anarky wrote: > > > like I said in another mail if I copy fat32 to linux partition > > (don't know what kind exactly, the default installed with mdk 9.1) the > > speed is constantly fast. But that is one side of it: that copy speed & > > dropdown. > > As I understand these tests (hdparm -tT ) don't have anything to do > > with the partition type (actually at least on hda I've got like 7 or 8 > > partitions) ... so maybe there's a problem in general in how my linux > > works with my hdds? > > This is actually more of an inefficiency of FAT/FAT32/NTFS partitions > and structures - not with GNU/linux; always bear in mind that > FAT/FAT32/NTFS file systems are more than 10 years old and haven't been > updated as Microsoft doesn't feel it necessary to do so...at least until > 2005... not 'really' true, As I recall, NTFS has been updated (in order to retain incompatibility)a couple of times, NTFS on XP is not exactly the same critter as NTFS on NT3.5 Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sunday 10 August 2003 04:24 pm, Stephen Kuhn wrote: > On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 03:54, David E. Fox wrote: > > > hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -c3 -m16 -A1 -W1 /dev/hdX > > > > Stephen - want to run down briefly those settings and what they mean? > > And doesn't -m16 set 16-bit? Wouldn't 32 bit be better? > > Ok... > > hdparm - program to set/change/configure IDE drive interface settings > > -X69 - TRANSFER_MODE - this is a relatively generic setting that I've > been using - you can use 68, 67, 69 or 70 - but I've found that 69 is > best (not a joke, y'all) - here is from the man page: > > Set the IDE transfer mode for newer (E)IDE/ATA drives. This is > typically used in combination with -d1 when enabling DMA to/from > a drive on a supported interface chipset, where -X mdma2 is used > to select multiword DMA mode2 transfers and -X sdma1 is used to > select simple mode 1 DMA transfers. With systems which support > UltraDMA burst timings, -X udma2 is used to select UltraDMA > mode2 transfers (you'll need to prepare the chipset for UltraDMA > beforehand). Apart from that, use of this flag is seldom neces- > sary since most/all modern IDE drives default to their fastest > PIO transfer mode at power-on. Fiddling with this can be both > needless and risky. On drives which support alternate transfer > modes, -X can be used to switch the mode of the drive only. > Prior to changing the transfer mode, the IDE interface should be > jumpered or programmed (see -p flag) for the new mode setting to > prevent loss and/or corruption of data. > For the PIO (Programmed Input/Output) transfer modes > used by Linux, this value is simply the desired PIO mode number > plus 8. Thus, a value of 09 sets PIO mode1, 10 enables PIO > mode2, and 11 selects PIO mode3. Setting 00 restores the > drive's "default" PIO mode, and 01 disables IORDY. For multi- > word DMA, the value used is the desired DMA mode number plus 32. > for UltraDMA, the value is the desired UltraDMA mode number plus > 64. > > -d1 - USE DMA > -u1 - UNMASK IRQ > -c3 - ENABLE 32-BIT TRANSFERS WITH SPECIAL SYNC > -m16 - set sector count for multiple sector count > -A1 - ENABLE DRIVE LOOK-AHEAD (forced) > -W1 - ENABLE WRITE CACHING > > I've experimented with heaps of drives and this seems to always be the > one that works the best - so much so that I created a script that I run > when I slap a customers (or a friends) drive into the MDK boxen... Stephen, do you not need to put the parameters in /etc/rc.d/rc.local or somewhere like that to get the hd set on each boot up? Long time back I seem to recall having to do that on one of my older machines but forgot about it till this thread popped up. -- Dennis M. linux user #180842 Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Stephen Kuhn wrote: This is actually more of an inefficiency of FAT/FAT32/NTFS partitions and structures - not with GNU/linux; always bear in mind that FAT/FAT32/NTFS file systems are more than 10 years old and haven't been updated as Microsoft doesn't feel it necessary to do so...at least until 2005... but if somebody (windows) knows how to handle them fast then maybe linux could do it too? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
> So, with that said, here are some settings that I've found work about > right for every drive I slap into a system here (for basically the same > thing): > > hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -c3 -m16 -A1 -W1 /dev/hdX Stephen - want to run down briefly those settings and what they mean? And doesn't -m16 set 16-bit? Wouldn't 32 bit be better? David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. --- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
> Your hardware is a good part of the slowness. OTOH, you didn't > say how you were transferring. I suspect it was with a GUI. If I wouldn't be surprised if ReiserFS on an IDE drive were faster than Windows FAT32 on a SCSI ultrawide 160... :) I do work occasionally with Windows, and Reiserfs feels like a RAM disk sometimes by comparison :). But I haven't done really much testing. Linux has always felt faster - it knocked my socks off the first time I tried using ext2 for serious things, having just come from DOS/Windows. > Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. --- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Monday August 11 2003 02:21 pm, John Richard Smith wrote: > yes, I think I experienced this when we went through my own > configuration with you a while back, and the conclusion I came to > was that overdoing anything the makers recomend is a zero sum > game to the degree to which you overclock, you get nothing for > nothing, so I went back to makers recommended settings, and since > I am not into gaming , blow it all. Not so fast partner ;> I was referring to HDD performance. Somethin cpu/cache/ram intensive scales linearly up with overclocking. A glibc src.rpm or kernel 'make bzImage', 'make modules' compile for examples. Most all benchmarks. OTOH, I've always overclocked mostly like mountain climbers say, "just 'cause its there". Besides, now'adays if your hardware isn't overclockable, you probly should'na bought it to begin with ;) If it isn't clockable, it probly won't run all that well at the specs the 'makers' set out. Dell is a good example ;> -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
---Original Message--- From: Tom Brinkman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 08/11/03 04:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow > > On Sunday August 10 2003 06:21 pm, Joeb wrote: > Just to add to this, if he's using /dev/hda and /dev/hdb aren't > they both on the same IDE controller on most systems? Since IDE > can only write to one drive at a time per controller, improved > performance would result in using the secondary IDE controller. > To further complicate it, since they're both on the same > controller (and cable) and one is UDMA 133 and the other UDMA > 100, the fastest they will go is 100 and maybe only 66 because of > the mismatch (although I'm not positive on the 66 part). > Finally, I believe Windows is caching it's writes which will > speed things up, at the expense of safety. > > Joeb There's two parts involved, the drive firmware (controller interface) and the controller on the motherboard. So unless you've got separate PCI controller cards, all the drives use the one controller, whether they're on the same cable or not. What is to be avoided is putting a CD drive and HDD on the same cable. In any event, no matter the number of controller cards you might have, they all use the one old and tired 33mhz PCI bus. There's a new PCI spec comin, PCI eXpress with a 66mhz bus. Like the AGP gimmick tho, it only marginally (+5%) improves performance. >[root /tom] $ hdparm -tT /dev/hd[ab] > >/dev/hda: (ata/133, udma6) > Timing buffer-cache reads: 1232 MB in 2.00 seconds = 616.00 >MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 140 MB in 3.00 seconds = 46.67 >MB/sec > >/dev/hdb: (ata/100, udma6) > Timing buffer-cache reads: 1252 MB in 2.00 seconds = 626.00 >MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 122 MB in 3.02 seconds = 40.40 >MB/sec Both hda and hdb are on ide0. I have a cdrom and a burner on ide1. BTW I've got a week old motherboard. Aopen AK77-400 Max/n, KT400a chipset, IDE controller. It has 3 ide ports, ide0, ide1, ide2 and a Serial/ATA port. So I could'a separated the HDD drives, one to a cable (ide port). But I knew there's no point in that. I believe the hdparm numbers back me up on that opinion ;) OTOH, hdparm spits out burst numbers. In the real world I get about 20mb/sec transfers, ReiserFS to RieserFS, whether just moving files on the same HDD, or hda to hdb. I didn't wanna try separating the HDD's. When I installed the new mobo/cpu/ram, I configured the ide's just as they were on the old mobo. So when I booted up for the first time, my existing Mandrake 9.2 install found the new onboard NIC, and then went on like nothin was amiss. If I had Windoze, I'd still be installing new drivers ;) The latest cooker 2.4.22 kernel has support for the Serial/ATA port, but I don't have a S/ATA drive to try out. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas > Some correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure someone on this list will :) ). But with two drives on a single IDE controller, hdparm will never show a degredation of speed because it tests each drive seperately, one after the other. As such, at the time of testings, only one drive is being accessed so there is no contention. If that is how the drives are used in real life, one at a time, then no problem, but for instance, let's say hda contains your web site and hdb has your ftp site and both have heavy access (of course, this is hypothetical, because if they are heavily accessed, you probably should be using SCSI). Anyway, if that is the scenario, IDE0 can only talk to hda OR hdb, not both so you will introduce a contention. If the hdb drive is moved to IDE1 (thus becoming hdc), then both hda and hdc can handle requests simultaneously. On a more practical note, I do a lot of compiling of software. To keep things simple, I have a source volume on a separate drive, and there is a noticable difference when the source I'm compiling is on a different controller than the lib and headers of the actual linux distro. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but it is significant in the amount of time difference (some things seconds, others minutes to hours). Anyway, for normal use, it probably won't make much of a difference, but if you're trying to squeeze maximum throughput out of a system and you have the extra IDE channel available, why not use it? Joeb Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:24, Anarky wrote: > you know ... turns out this slowdown only happens when copying from > fat32 to fat32 ... when copying from fat32 to linux partition it's > constantly at about 9mb/second. Still, acording to your huge test > results my hdds might be somehow missconfigured, or is > > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.87 seconds = 34.22 MB/sec > > normal for a 7200 rpm 20Gb Ibm drive? I think that part of the problem IS in the fact that you're copying FAT32 to FAT32 - what happens when you copy it to ext3 or ReiserFS and then to FAT32? -- Mon Aug 11 10:30:00 EST 2003 10:30:00 up 7 days, 14:18, 1 user, load average: 2.38, 2.40, 2.25 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * If it's working, the diagnostics say it's fine. If it's not working, the diagnostics say it's fine. - A proposed addition to rules for realtime programming Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Tom Brinkman wrote: On Monday August 11 2003 03:50 pm, John Richard Smith wrote: Tom, Why does your previous example so much faster everything, what is it and how you configure that makes the difference ? John Well, I'm reading this thread and seein the suggestions to use hdparm parameters in rc.local or harddisks with some wonderment. With Mandrake 9.x, you shouldn't need to configure any hdparm parameters. Mandrake does it automatically unless it detects known problem hardware or configurations, even without hdparm being installed. IIRC this began with 8.2. Forcing hdparm parameters should be done with caution. You see I found adding anything to /etc/sysconfig/harddisks made no difference,and while I assumed by default , that I gained nothing, so I went back to nothing here. So your've confirmed what I felt. It can easily lead to file system corruption. 'info hdparm' contains many warnings. So to answer your question, I didn't do anything, Mandrake did it. I just use quality hardware and ReiserFS 3.6. So my good hdparm -Tt numbers (T=650mb/s, t=47mb/s) are due to many factors, 9.2 current cooker and a Mandrake 2.4.22 kernel among them. Mandrake is installed on the second hda partition, just after the /swap partition. So both are on the fastest sections of the HDD platters. Probly 40% faster than the outer edges of the platters. Yep. that's how Iunderstand it. True for all HDD's, newest to the older ones, inspite of rpm speeds. Tho higher rpm drives will deliver better performance, there's still the drop off as you go out on the platters. VP_IDE: VIA vt8235 (rev 00) IDE UDMA133 controller on pci00:11.1 ide0: BM-DMA at 0xdc00-0xdc07, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:DMA ide1: BM-DMA at 0xdc08-0xdc0f, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:DMA That's a kt400a (pre-kt600) chipset runnin an overclocked XP 3000+ at 88 mhz higher than a 3200+ (176x13, 2288mhz). 512mb DDR400 ram runnin at DDR416 (416mhz) at CL2.5, 2-bank (a single 2-bank stick). Vcore, IO, and AGP voltages, I raised above normal (+.1v each). Two Maxtor 7200rpm, 2mb cache drives. One fairly new ata/133, one an older ata/100 (altho dmesg shows both setup as ata/133). No shared IRQ's, 4 hard drives , and 3 ide lines so how do you achieve seperate IRQ's or is that a daft question. everything has it's own interrupt. To be honest, the overclock has very little or nothing to do with HDD performance, tho the PCI bus is at 35mhz. yes, I think I experienced this when we went through my own configuration with you a while back, and the conclusion I came to was that overdoing anything the makers recomend is a zero sum game to the degree to which you overclock, you get nothing for nothing, so I went back to makers recommended settings, and since I am not into gaming , blow it all. The system will clock even faster, but I don't want the PCI bus speeds getting too far off spec. That can actually hurt HDD and AGP video performance/stability. Both of which use the PCI bus. My Abit AGP nVidia GeF2 card doesn't even like 35mhz very much ;) So I set the aperature to 4MB and set it to agp=1x, effectively disabling sidebanding. I also don't use nvidia's closed source driver. I particularly sought out a kt400a chipset board due to rave reviews, better performance than nforce2 chipsets. My one week experience with it certainly bears this out. Aopen AK77-400 Max/n (AMD approv'd). My old Sparkle 300w PSU (also AMD apprv'd) puts out extremely stable voltages, all a touch over spec. Rock steady voltages are very important to high system performance, HHD's included. Bottom line: I attribute my good HDD performance mostly to the PSU, chipset/motherboard, Maxtor 7200 rpm's, and Mandrake. that sums it up then BTW, the numbers I posted were with X and dozens of processes runnin. As someone already correctly pointed out, hdparm -Tt needs to be run several times and an average taken. I posted my average numbers, actually some of my lower results. If you wanna cheat a little, boot to level 3, kill all unnecessary processes, then run hdparm -Tt. I'd rather have real world, as I use the system, numbers tho ;) OTOH, hdparm -Tt numbers have little to do with real world performance. FWIW, an I know this upsets some of y'all, you'll never see good performance with a store bought ready made system, or a laptop. If ya can't/won't do it yourself, find a good trustworthy system builder to do it for you. If ya havt'a have a laptop, you're just SOL ;> But those figures were very good Tom, well done we need someone to show us the way. Thanks. John -- John Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sunday August 10 2003 11:38 am, Anarky wrote: > hi everybody ... me new ... I just had a very embarassing > moment today. A friend came by with his hdd .. and I was copying > about 1Gb of data from one hdd to another. My linux preaching > was going pretty well .. and he was pretty much willing to give > it a try too ... but then ... well .. copying from one hdd to > another was SOO slow that I had to reboot in windows. very > embarassing. > anyway, now I've done some tests and copying with Krusader > gave me some speed results: > the copying starts off at a boooming nice 8Mb/second .. and then > gradually by the time it copies 200Mb it's at like 1Mb per sec .. > and my hdds are making a noise like they're going to die ... plz > help. It can't be hardware problems because in windows it copies > the stuff fast .. and at a constant speed (can't say exactly ... > but I got a feel for the time it takes to copy 700Mb ... and it > takes a LOT longer in linux) > > Now for my specs: > > I should mention that I"m copying from on fat32 partition to > another. running mandrake 9.1, no updates, > the tested drive speeds are: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] void]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda > > /dev/hda: > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 > MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.87 seconds = > 34.22 MB/sec > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] void]# hdparm -tT /dev/hdd > > /dev/hdd: > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 > MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.87 seconds = > 22.30 MB/sec > > both my drives are udma if I read the output of 'hdparm -i > /dev/hda' & 'hdparm -i /dev/hda' correctly: > for hda: > UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 *udma4 udma5 udma6 > and for hdd: > UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 *udma2 udma3 udma4 > > so that's not it ... > > umm .. what else: I've got 256Mb SD ... and I don't know the > motherboard type exactly (kt133B?) ... anyway, the proc is K7 > Athlon 550Mhz slot A > > he me ... please!!! > > > greets & thanks in advance to everybody [root /tom] $ hdparm -tT /dev/hd[ab] /dev/hda: (ata/133, udma6) Timing buffer-cache reads: 1232 MB in 2.00 seconds = 616.00 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 140 MB in 3.00 seconds = 46.67 MB/sec /dev/hdb: (ata/100, udma6) Timing buffer-cache reads: 1252 MB in 2.00 seconds = 626.00 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 122 MB in 3.02 seconds = 40.40 MB/sec Your hardware is a good part of the slowness. OTOH, you didn't say how you were transferring. I suspect it was with a GUI. If you'd have used the CL, Linux would smoke Winblows. Maybe not necessarily faster, but Linux does proper verification, Winsux slides over this. Google 'CRC checks' Also, if the files had been on a real file system, and not subject to M$ fragmentation, the transfer would'a been no problem. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On 10 Aug 2003 22:12:14 +1000, Stephen Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2003-08-10 at 21:38, Anarky wrote: > > hi everybody ... me new ... I just had a very embarassing moment > > today. A friend came by with his hdd .. and I was copying about 1Gb of > > data from one hdd to another. My linux preaching was going pretty well > > .. and he was pretty much willing to give it a try too ... > > > ...So, with that said, here are some settings that I've found work about > right for every drive I slap into a system here (for basically the same > thing): > > hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -c3 -m16 -A1 -W1 /dev/hdX > > (where X is the letter of the device) And make sure you put the second drive on the other IDE channel. Miark Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 16:31, Stephen Kuhn wrote: > On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 05:49, Heather/Femme wrote: > > > /dev/hda: > > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.19 seconds =673.68 MB/sec > > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.45 seconds = 44.14 MB/sec > > > > > > No idea if thats normal or good or bad.. i dunno what i'm looking > > for..so thought i'd throw this in & ask. :) > > > > I ran the test 3 times too... thats the last reading. > > Since it's on YOUR computer, it's bad. but is that bad, like really good, like "that sure is a bad hot rod", or bad like nasty, as in "when you are good you are good, but when you are bad you are really good", or bad like foul, as in "that Avocado has gone bad". Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
> -X69 - TRANSFER_MODE - this is a relatively generic setting that I've > been using - you can use 68, 67, 69 or 70 - but I've found that 69 is > best (not a joke, y'all) - here is from the man page: Oh I see now. -X says DANGEROUS on the hdparm man page. But it might be OK. Since you've worked with a number of drives then I guess it is all right. I went ahead and put it on /dev/hdb and it's a little bit faster: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hdb /dev/hdb: Timing buffer-cache reads: 232 MB in 2.00 seconds = 116.00 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 72 MB in 3.06 seconds = 23.53 MB/sec But of course, I'm downloading, transcoding a dvd with dvd:rip, and doing other stuff too. So it's bound to be a little bit low. I'd expect excess of 35-40 on IDE with bus speed 66. Is that not unreasonable? David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. --- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Monday August 11 2003 02:49 pm, Heather/Femme wrote: > WD 120 gb:[EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda > > /dev/hda: > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.19 seconds =673.68 > MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.45 seconds = > 44.14 MB/sec > > > No idea if thats normal or good or bad.. i dunno what i'm looking > for..so thought i'd throw this in & ask. :) > > I ran the test 3 times too... thats the last reading. Average is important, over 5 or 6 runs. But those numbers are very good. Mine average 650/47. The highest I've seen is 698/48. OTOH, the latest hdparm-5.4-2mdk uses bigger, different tests. It measures T over 2 seconds, about 1200 to 1300mb rather than the old 128mb test. Similarly with t, it measures over 3 seconds, about 140+ mb's, rather than 64mb. So the numbers might not be all that comparable. I've tested with the old and new hdparm tho, and the t number, the important one, Timing buffered disk reads is constant ... 47+ mb/sec. I suspect the new hdparm is more accurate. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 19:56, Anarky wrote: > like I said in another mail if I copy fat32 to linux partition > (don't know what kind exactly, the default installed with mdk 9.1) the > speed is constantly fast. But that is one side of it: that copy speed & > dropdown. > As I understand these tests (hdparm -tT ) don't have anything to do > with the partition type (actually at least on hda I've got like 7 or 8 > partitions) ... so maybe there's a problem in general in how my linux > works with my hdds? This is actually more of an inefficiency of FAT/FAT32/NTFS partitions and structures - not with GNU/linux; always bear in mind that FAT/FAT32/NTFS file systems are more than 10 years old and haven't been updated as Microsoft doesn't feel it necessary to do so...at least until 2005... -- Mon Aug 11 20:10:01 EST 2003 20:10:01 up 7 days, 23:58, 1 user, load average: 3.01, 2.24, 2.01 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * Indeed, the first noble truth of Buddhism, usually translated as `all life is suffering,' is more accurately rendered `life is filled with a sense of pervasive unsatisfactoriness.' -- M.D. Epstein Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sunday 10 August 2003 06:14 pm, Anarky wrote: > Stephen Kuhn wrote: > >In the case of slapping hard drives into your machine and then copying > >data to them, it's best to get to know HDPARM quite well, and how to > >tweak drive settings with it. > > > >After slapping the drive in your boxen and getting linux up and running > >and recognising the drive, you're going to want to force some params on > >it in order to get some better throughput - much better than what you > >experienced today. > > > >I honestly suggest reading very carefully through the HDPARM man pages, > >but then again, I know about RTFM and how often we choose not to do > >that... > > I've looked through there a lot .. but am confused about all the > hardware details. > > >So, with that said, here are some settings that I've found work about > >right for every drive I slap into a system here (for basically the same > >thing): > > > >hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -c3 -m16 -A1 -W1 /dev/hdX > > > >(where X is the letter of the device) > > I did this on /dev/hdd ... and .. well, it seems the results are > even worse than before: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] void]# hdparm -tT /dev/hdd > > /dev/hdd: > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.96 seconds =133.33 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.88 seconds = 22.22 MB/sec > > > whiel before it was: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] void]# hdparm -tT /dev/hdd > > /dev/hdd: > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.87 seconds = 22.30 MB/sec > > > so what can I do (without buying new hardware or moving back to > windows) ? > There's got to be soemthing ... and btw, how do I reset to what it was > before/default? will it reset after reboot? It's this speed drop thing > that's weird: it starts copying with 9Mb per sec .. but quickly drops to > 3,2,1 Mb/sec (quickly as in in 30 seconds). Sorry for butting in, but, correct me if I'm wrong here, civileme always said to run the hdparm -tT /dev/hdx command three times minimum to get a correct reading, that said I would try Stephens hdparm parameters and see if you get an improvement. You should not have to reboot to see it, it should make an immediate difference. I just wish I could remember where to put the parameters to get set up on a new boot. HTH -- Dennis M. linux user #180842 Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 02:55, ed tharp wrote: > not 'really' true, As I recall, NTFS has been updated (in order to > retain incompatibility)a couple of times, NTFS on XP is not exactly the > same critter as NTFS on NT3.5 It still sucks nonetheless. Too bad they're (M$) not smart enough to make use of say, ReiserFS... -- Tue Aug 12 09:04:59 EST 2003 09:04:59 up 8 days, 12:53, 1 user, load average: 1.07, 1.20, 1.17 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * HP had a unique policy of allowing its engineers to take parts from stock as long as they built something. "They figured that with every design, they were getting a better engineer. It's a policy I urge all companies to adopt." -- Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, "Will Wozniak's class give Apple to teacher?" EE Times, June 6, 1988, pg 45 Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
you know ... turns out this slowdown only happens when copying from fat32 to fat32 ... when copying from fat32 to linux partition it's constantly at about 9mb/second. Still, acording to your huge test results my hdds might be somehow missconfigured, or is Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.87 seconds = 34.22 MB/sec normal for a 7200 rpm 20Gb Ibm drive? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Monday 11 Aug 2003 6:15 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote: > Well, I'm reading this thread and seein the suggestions to use > hdparm parameters in rc.local or harddisks with some wonderment. > With Mandrake 9.x, you shouldn't need to configure any hdparm > parameters. Mandrake does it automatically unless it detects known A very good info. Thanks a lot. I have just ordered ASUS A7N8X deluxe mother board with Athlon XP 2400+ (I couldn't better cpu in my town) and 256 mb 333 DDR Ram for swap with my present system PIII 866, intel 815 kobian board and 256 mb sdram. Any suggestions for tweaking it better will be appreciated. -- L.V.Gandhi 203, Soundaryalahari Apartments, Lawsons Bay colony, Visakhapatnam, 530017 MECON, 5th Floor, RTC Complex, Visakhapatnam AP 530020 INDIA Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Monday August 11 2003 03:50 pm, John Richard Smith wrote: > Tom, > > Why does your previous example so much faster everything, what is > it and how you configure that makes the difference ? > > John Well, I'm reading this thread and seein the suggestions to use hdparm parameters in rc.local or harddisks with some wonderment. With Mandrake 9.x, you shouldn't need to configure any hdparm parameters. Mandrake does it automatically unless it detects known problem hardware or configurations, even without hdparm being installed. IIRC this began with 8.2. Forcing hdparm parameters should be done with caution. It can easily lead to file system corruption. 'info hdparm' contains many warnings. So to answer your question, I didn't do anything, Mandrake did it. I just use quality hardware and ReiserFS 3.6. So my good hdparm -Tt numbers (T=650mb/s, t=47mb/s) are due to many factors, 9.2 current cooker and a Mandrake 2.4.22 kernel among them. Mandrake is installed on the second hda partition, just after the /swap partition. So both are on the fastest sections of the HDD platters. Probly 40% faster than the outer edges of the platters. True for all HDD's, newest to the older ones, inspite of rpm speeds. Tho higher rpm drives will deliver better performance, there's still the drop off as you go out on the platters. VP_IDE: VIA vt8235 (rev 00) IDE UDMA133 controller on pci00:11.1 ide0: BM-DMA at 0xdc00-0xdc07, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:DMA ide1: BM-DMA at 0xdc08-0xdc0f, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:DMA That's a kt400a (pre-kt600) chipset runnin an overclocked XP 3000+ at 88 mhz higher than a 3200+ (176x13, 2288mhz). 512mb DDR400 ram runnin at DDR416 (416mhz) at CL2.5, 2-bank (a single 2-bank stick). Vcore, IO, and AGP voltages, I raised above normal (+.1v each). Two Maxtor 7200rpm, 2mb cache drives. One fairly new ata/133, one an older ata/100 (altho dmesg shows both setup as ata/133). No shared IRQ's, everything has it's own interrupt. To be honest, the overclock has very little or nothing to do with HDD performance, tho the PCI bus is at 35mhz. The system will clock even faster, but I don't want the PCI bus speeds getting too far off spec. That can actually hurt HDD and AGP video performance/stability. Both of which use the PCI bus. My Abit AGP nVidia GeF2 card doesn't even like 35mhz very much ;) So I set the aperature to 4MB and set it to agp=1x, effectively disabling sidebanding. I also don't use nvidia's closed source driver. I particularly sought out a kt400a chipset board due to rave reviews, better performance than nforce2 chipsets. My one week experience with it certainly bears this out. Aopen AK77-400 Max/n (AMD approv'd). My old Sparkle 300w PSU (also AMD apprv'd) puts out extremely stable voltages, all a touch over spec. Rock steady voltages are very important to high system performance, HHD's included. Bottom line: I attribute my good HDD performance mostly to the PSU, chipset/motherboard, Maxtor 7200 rpm's, and Mandrake. BTW, the numbers I posted were with X and dozens of processes runnin. As someone already correctly pointed out, hdparm -Tt needs to be run several times and an average taken. I posted my average numbers, actually some of my lower results. If you wanna cheat a little, boot to level 3, kill all unnecessary processes, then run hdparm -Tt. I'd rather have real world, as I use the system, numbers tho ;) OTOH, hdparm -Tt numbers have little to do with real world performance. FWIW, an I know this upsets some of y'all, you'll never see good performance with a store bought ready made system, or a laptop. If ya can't/won't do it yourself, find a good trustworthy system builder to do it for you. If ya havt'a have a laptop, you're just SOL ;> -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Tom Brinkman wrote: On Sunday August 10 2003 11:38 am, Anarky wrote: hi everybody ... me new ... I just had a very embarassing moment today. A friend came by with his hdd .. and I was copying about 1Gb of data from one hdd to another. My linux preaching was going pretty well .. and he was pretty much willing to give it a try too ... but then ... well .. copying from one hdd to another was SOO slow that I had to reboot in windows. very embarassing. anyway, now I've done some tests and copying with Krusader gave me some speed results: the copying starts off at a boooming nice 8Mb/second .. and then gradually by the time it copies 200Mb it's at like 1Mb per sec .. and my hdds are making a noise like they're going to die ... plz help. It can't be hardware problems because in windows it copies the stuff fast .. and at a constant speed (can't say exactly ... but I got a feel for the time it takes to copy 700Mb ... and it takes a LOT longer in linux) Now for my specs: I should mention that I"m copying from on fat32 partition to another. running mandrake 9.1, no updates, the tested drive speeds are: [EMAIL PROTECTED] void]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda /dev/hda: Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.87 seconds = 34.22 MB/sec [EMAIL PROTECTED] void]# hdparm -tT /dev/hdd /dev/hdd: Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.87 seconds = 22.30 MB/sec both my drives are udma if I read the output of 'hdparm -i /dev/hda' & 'hdparm -i /dev/hda' correctly: for hda: UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 *udma4 udma5 udma6 and for hdd: UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 *udma2 udma3 udma4 so that's not it ... umm .. what else: I've got 256Mb SD ... and I don't know the motherboard type exactly (kt133B?) ... anyway, the proc is K7 Athlon 550Mhz slot A he me ... please!!! greets & thanks in advance to everybody [root /tom] $ hdparm -tT /dev/hd[ab] /dev/hda: (ata/133, udma6) Timing buffer-cache reads: 1232 MB in 2.00 seconds = 616.00 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 140 MB in 3.00 seconds = 46.67 MB/sec /dev/hdb: (ata/100, udma6) Timing buffer-cache reads: 1252 MB in 2.00 seconds = 626.00 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 122 MB in 3.02 seconds = 40.40 MB/sec Your hardware is a good part of the slowness. OTOH, you didn't say how you were transferring. I suspect it was with a GUI. If you'd have used the CL, Linux would smoke Winblows. Maybe not necessarily faster, but Linux does proper verification, Winsux slides over this. Google 'CRC checks' Also, if the files had been on a real file system, and not subject to M$ fragmentation, the transfer would'a been no problem. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Just to add to this, if he's using /dev/hda and /dev/hdb aren't they both on the same IDE controller on most systems? Since IDE can only write to one drive at a time per controller, improved performance would result in using the secondary IDE controller. To further complicate it, since they're both on the same controller (and cable) and one is UDMA 133 and the other UDMA 100, the fastest they will go is 100 and maybe only 66 because of the mismatch (although I'm not positive on the 66 part). Finally, I believe Windows is caching it's writes which will speed things up, at the expense of safety. Joeb Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Monday August 11 2003 02:13 am, L.V.Gandhi wrote: > On Sunday 10 Aug 2003 3:26 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote: > > [root /tom] $ hdparm -tT /dev/hd[ab] > > > > /dev/hda: (ata/133, udma6) > > === > underlined data is not shown for me. I added it. From the results you posted it looks like your drives are ata/100, udma5 -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sunday August 10 2003 06:21 pm, Joeb wrote: > Just to add to this, if he's using /dev/hda and /dev/hdb aren't > they both on the same IDE controller on most systems? Since IDE > can only write to one drive at a time per controller, improved > performance would result in using the secondary IDE controller. > To further complicate it, since they're both on the same > controller (and cable) and one is UDMA 133 and the other UDMA > 100, the fastest they will go is 100 and maybe only 66 because of > the mismatch (although I'm not positive on the 66 part). > Finally, I believe Windows is caching it's writes which will > speed things up, at the expense of safety. > > Joeb There's two parts involved, the drive firmware (controller interface) and the controller on the motherboard. So unless you've got separate PCI controller cards, all the drives use the one controller, whether they're on the same cable or not. What is to be avoided is putting a CD drive and HDD on the same cable. In any event, no matter the number of controller cards you might have, they all use the one old and tired 33mhz PCI bus. There's a new PCI spec comin, PCI eXpress with a 66mhz bus. Like the AGP gimmick tho, it only marginally (+5%) improves performance. >[root /tom] $ hdparm -tT /dev/hd[ab] > >/dev/hda: (ata/133, udma6) > Timing buffer-cache reads: 1232 MB in 2.00 seconds = 616.00 >MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 140 MB in 3.00 seconds = 46.67 >MB/sec > >/dev/hdb: (ata/100, udma6) > Timing buffer-cache reads: 1252 MB in 2.00 seconds = 626.00 >MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 122 MB in 3.02 seconds = 40.40 >MB/sec Both hda and hdb are on ide0. I have a cdrom and a burner on ide1. BTW I've got a week old motherboard. Aopen AK77-400 Max/n, KT400a chipset, IDE controller. It has 3 ide ports, ide0, ide1, ide2 and a Serial/ATA port. So I could'a separated the HDD drives, one to a cable (ide port). But I knew there's no point in that. I believe the hdparm numbers back me up on that opinion ;) OTOH, hdparm spits out burst numbers. In the real world I get about 20mb/sec transfers, ReiserFS to RieserFS, whether just moving files on the same HDD, or hda to hdb. I didn't wanna try separating the HDD's. When I installed the new mobo/cpu/ram, I configured the ide's just as they were on the old mobo. So when I booted up for the first time, my existing Mandrake 9.2 install found the new onboard NIC, and then went on like nothin was amiss. If I had Windoze, I'd still be installing new drivers ;) The latest cooker 2.4.22 kernel has support for the Serial/ATA port, but I don't have a S/ATA drive to try out. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Dennis Myers wrote: On Sunday 10 August 2003 07:32 pm, Stephen Kuhn wrote: On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:20, Dennis Myers wrote: Stephen, do you not need to put the parameters in /etc/rc.d/rc.local or somewhere like that to get the hd set on each boot up? Long time back I seem to recall having to do that on one of my older machines but forgot about it till this thread popped up. /etc/sysconfig/harddisks That was it, thank you. so if I don't change there and just reboot whatever paramaters I just gave won't hold, right? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
Stephen Kuhn wrote: On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:14, Anarky wrote: so what can I do (without buying new hardware or moving back to windows) ? There's got to be soemthing ... and btw, how do I reset to what it was before/default? will it reset after reboot? It's this speed drop thing that's weird: it starts copying with 9Mb per sec .. but quickly drops to 3,2,1 Mb/sec (quickly as in in 30 seconds). Well, something is definitely up with that - do you have both HD's on the same cable? Does your motherboard support ATA133/ATA100? I don't trully know ... but it can't be something hardware related, because as I said if I reboot to windows I get a constant fast copy Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:14, Anarky wrote: > so what can I do (without buying new hardware or moving back to > windows) ? > There's got to be soemthing ... and btw, how do I reset to what it was > before/default? will it reset after reboot? It's this speed drop thing > that's weird: it starts copying with 9Mb per sec .. but quickly drops to > 3,2,1 Mb/sec (quickly as in in 30 seconds). Well, something is definitely up with that - do you have both HD's on the same cable? Does your motherboard support ATA133/ATA100? -- Mon Aug 11 10:30:00 EST 2003 10:30:00 up 7 days, 14:18, 1 user, load average: 2.38, 2.40, 2.25 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * If it's working, the diagnostics say it's fine. If it's not working, the diagnostics say it's fine. - A proposed addition to rules for realtime programming Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
> /dev/hdd: > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.85 seconds =150.59 MB/sec > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.87 seconds = 22.30 MB/sec Gad, mine are abysmal. But then the drives are currently being written to or read from, not idle. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hda /dev/hda: Timing buffer-cache reads: 208 MB in 2.00 seconds = 104.00 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 14 MB in 3.37 seconds = 4.15 MB/sec [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hdb /dev/hdb: Timing buffer-cache reads: 200 MB in 2.01 seconds = 99.50 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 70 MB in 3.04 seconds = 23.03 MB/sec [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# hdparm /dev/hdb /dev/hdb: multcount= 16 (on) IO_support = 1 (32-bit) unmaskirq= 1 (on) using_dma= 1 (on) keepsettings = 0 (off) readonly = 0 (off) readahead= 8 (on) geometry = 3737/255/63, sectors = 60036480, start = 0 /dev/hdb is where I do everything now, since cooker 9.2 - I left out /var on /dev/hda1, because my other install uses it. They are on the same IDE (not 100 or wide, regular 33/66, I didn't get that to work 2 years ago when I put the box together.) I also have had problems in the past if the two HDs are on different channels, and getting the cdrom to work.) hdb is an IBM DTLA 30 gig drive (10/2000), hda is an aging Maxstor 1.6 gig drive ca. 1996. David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. --- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] hdd copying VERY slow
On Sun, 2003-08-10 at 21:38, Anarky wrote: > hi everybody ... me new ... I just had a very embarassing moment > today. A friend came by with his hdd .. and I was copying about 1Gb of > data from one hdd to another. My linux preaching was going pretty well > .. and he was pretty much willing to give it a try too ... In the case of slapping hard drives into your machine and then copying data to them, it's best to get to know HDPARM quite well, and how to tweak drive settings with it. After slapping the drive in your boxen and getting linux up and running and recognising the drive, you're going to want to force some params on it in order to get some better throughput - much better than what you experienced today. I honestly suggest reading very carefully through the HDPARM man pages, but then again, I know about RTFM and how often we choose not to do that... So, with that said, here are some settings that I've found work about right for every drive I slap into a system here (for basically the same thing): hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -c3 -m16 -A1 -W1 /dev/hdX (where X is the letter of the device) -- Sun Aug 10 22:05:00 EST 2003 22:05:00 up 7 days, 1:53, 1 user, load average: 4.18, 3.89, 3.67 - |____ |kuhn media australia| | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | | .\__/ || | | || | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn| | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1+ & RH 9 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 - * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * GOOD-NIGHT, everybody ... Now I have to go administer FIRST-AID to my pet LEISURE SUIT!! Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
