Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
From the tests I did, UFS gave good results so I guess ZFS would be ok. The USB device is used to exchange data with foreign platforms and unfortunately ZFS is far away from being the common denominator filesystem wise. I suspect the fuse layer being the issue, here but won't have the oportunity to verify this before September. Best regards. Ben - Mail original - De: Jonathan Adams t12nsloo...@gmail.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Jeudi 30 Juillet 2015 17:09:47 Objet: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance I know it's a little off-topic, but have you thought of creating a zpool on the USB stick and seeing how that goes? ZFS on Linux works well for removable media, assuming you can sudo zpool import Jon PS. I generally end up dd'ing with a block size of 4M to get maximum throughput. On 30 July 2015 at 15:17, Jean-Pierre André jean-pierre.an...@wanadoo.fr wrote: benta...@chez.com wrote: Hi Jean-Pierre, I was using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE, with no specific option for mount command : # ntfs-3g -o uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt Since then I switched to the last version available on your website (2015.3.14AR.1), and redid the test, still using the same mount command. $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 1412712+0 records in 1412712+0 records out 723308544 bytes (723 MB) copied, 2552.51 s, 283 kB/s I stopped it as it wasn't necessary to wait 3h $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 166643+0 records in 166643+0 records out 682569728 bytes (683 MB) copied, 2360.02 s, 289 kB/s Stopped as well Mount with big_writes option # ntfs-3g -o big_writes,uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt The big_writes option is not supported by the fuse variant for OpenIndiana. $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 207578+0 records in 207578+0 records out 850239488 bytes (850 MB) copied, 3691.7 s, 230 kB/s Stopped as well Now I format the disk on Win7 to NTFS, 512b rather than defaulting to 4096b $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 172937+0 records in 172937+0 records out 708349952 bytes (708 MB) copied, 2367.44 s, 299 kB/s Stopped as well I don't really know what to blame, maybe the FUSE stage might the bottleneck here. ntfs-3g has never been efficient on bulk transfers because it is organized on top of fuse, but there must be another explanation for this very bad throughput. I have no idea why, ATM. Regards Jean-Pierre Maybe dd is not really the good command to test this as well. I wanted to test exFAT as weel but I'm running out of time before going off until September. Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
I know it's a little off-topic, but have you thought of creating a zpool on the USB stick and seeing how that goes? ZFS on Linux works well for removable media, assuming you can sudo zpool import Jon PS. I generally end up dd'ing with a block size of 4M to get maximum throughput. On 30 July 2015 at 15:17, Jean-Pierre André jean-pierre.an...@wanadoo.fr wrote: benta...@chez.com wrote: Hi Jean-Pierre, I was using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE, with no specific option for mount command : # ntfs-3g -o uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt Since then I switched to the last version available on your website (2015.3.14AR.1), and redid the test, still using the same mount command. $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 1412712+0 records in 1412712+0 records out 723308544 bytes (723 MB) copied, 2552.51 s, 283 kB/s I stopped it as it wasn't necessary to wait 3h $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 166643+0 records in 166643+0 records out 682569728 bytes (683 MB) copied, 2360.02 s, 289 kB/s Stopped as well Mount with big_writes option # ntfs-3g -o big_writes,uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt The big_writes option is not supported by the fuse variant for OpenIndiana. $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 207578+0 records in 207578+0 records out 850239488 bytes (850 MB) copied, 3691.7 s, 230 kB/s Stopped as well Now I format the disk on Win7 to NTFS, 512b rather than defaulting to 4096b $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 172937+0 records in 172937+0 records out 708349952 bytes (708 MB) copied, 2367.44 s, 299 kB/s Stopped as well I don't really know what to blame, maybe the FUSE stage might the bottleneck here. ntfs-3g has never been efficient on bulk transfers because it is organized on top of fuse, but there must be another explanation for this very bad throughput. I have no idea why, ATM. Regards Jean-Pierre Maybe dd is not really the good command to test this as well. I wanted to test exFAT as weel but I'm running out of time before going off until September. Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
benta...@chez.com wrote: Hi Jean-Pierre, I was using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE, with no specific option for mount command : # ntfs-3g -o uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt Since then I switched to the last version available on your website (2015.3.14AR.1), and redid the test, still using the same mount command. $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 1412712+0 records in 1412712+0 records out 723308544 bytes (723 MB) copied, 2552.51 s, 283 kB/s I stopped it as it wasn't necessary to wait 3h $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 166643+0 records in 166643+0 records out 682569728 bytes (683 MB) copied, 2360.02 s, 289 kB/s Stopped as well Mount with big_writes option # ntfs-3g -o big_writes,uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt The big_writes option is not supported by the fuse variant for OpenIndiana. $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 207578+0 records in 207578+0 records out 850239488 bytes (850 MB) copied, 3691.7 s, 230 kB/s Stopped as well Now I format the disk on Win7 to NTFS, 512b rather than defaulting to 4096b $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 172937+0 records in 172937+0 records out 708349952 bytes (708 MB) copied, 2367.44 s, 299 kB/s Stopped as well I don't really know what to blame, maybe the FUSE stage might the bottleneck here. ntfs-3g has never been efficient on bulk transfers because it is organized on top of fuse, but there must be another explanation for this very bad throughput. I have no idea why, ATM. Regards Jean-Pierre Maybe dd is not really the good command to test this as well. I wanted to test exFAT as weel but I'm running out of time before going off until September. Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
Jean-Pierre André wrote: Aurélien Larcher wrote: Hi, [...] using NTFS-3g $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 15867.8 s, 127 kB/s After reformating to UFS $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/ben/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 110.893 s, 18.2 MB/s Yeah, really, something is wrong with the implementation of FAT/NTFS on OpenIndiana. Would a more recent NTFS-3G help ? Currently using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE. Which version of ntfs-3g were you using and what are your mount options ? What is the output of ntfs-3g -help ? Oh, I forgot : retry dd with option bs=4096, so that the fuse kernel module need not concatenate write chunks (the default block size is 512 for dd). Jean-Pierre ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
Hi Jean-Pierre, I was using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE, with no specific option for mount command : # ntfs-3g -o uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt Since then I switched to the last version available on your website (2015.3.14AR.1), and redid the test, still using the same mount command. $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 1412712+0 records in 1412712+0 records out 723308544 bytes (723 MB) copied, 2552.51 s, 283 kB/s I stopped it as it wasn't necessary to wait 3h $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 166643+0 records in 166643+0 records out 682569728 bytes (683 MB) copied, 2360.02 s, 289 kB/s Stopped as well Mount with big_writes option # ntfs-3g -o big_writes,uid=101 /dev/dsk/c2t0d0p1 /mnt $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img bs=4096 207578+0 records in 207578+0 records out 850239488 bytes (850 MB) copied, 3691.7 s, 230 kB/s Stopped as well Now I format the disk on Win7 to NTFS, 512b rather than defaulting to 4096b $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 172937+0 records in 172937+0 records out 708349952 bytes (708 MB) copied, 2367.44 s, 299 kB/s Stopped as well I don't really know what to blame, maybe the FUSE stage might the bottleneck here. Maybe dd is not really the good command to test this as well. I wanted to test exFAT as weel but I'm running out of time before going off until September. Ben - Mail original - De: Jean-Pierre André jean-pierre.an...@wanadoo.fr À: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Mardi 28 Juillet 2015 20:16:25 Objet: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Jean-Pierre André wrote: Aurélien Larcher wrote: Hi, [...] using NTFS-3g $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 15867.8 s, 127 kB/s After reformating to UFS $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/ben/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 110.893 s, 18.2 MB/s Yeah, really, something is wrong with the implementation of FAT/NTFS on OpenIndiana. Would a more recent NTFS-3G help ? Currently using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE. Which version of ntfs-3g were you using and what are your mount options ? What is the output of ntfs-3g -help ? Oh, I forgot : retry dd with option bs=4096, so that the fuse kernel module need not concatenate write chunks (the default block size is 512 for dd). Jean-Pierre ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
Aurélien Larcher wrote: Hi, There is indeed a much newer version of ntfs-3g on Jean-Pierre André's website: 2015.3.14AR.1. He posted very good results earlier this year. Having these in oi-userland is on the TODO list and would be great. The ntfs-3g library is already part of Hipster, only the fuse interface and fuse itself are missing. The current bottleneck is the interface between the vfs and the fuse kernel module for concatenating write chunks into memory pages. Thanks for your report. Best, Aurélien À mar. juil. 28 04:08:00 2015 GMT+0200, benta...@chez.com a écrit : I did some test today with another USB drive. Here are the results : From Linux (NTFS) $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/media/ben/MD/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 enregistrements lus 3948544+0 enregistrements écrits 2021654528 octets (2.0 GB) copiés, 91.5862 s, 22.1 MB/s From OI Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname usba: [ID 912658 kern.info] USB 2.0 device (usb5e3,702) operating at hi speed (USB 2.x) on USB 2.0 root hub: storage@7, scsa2usb0 at bus address 2 Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname usba: [ID 349649 kern.info] USB TO IDE Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] scsa2usb0 is /pci@0,0/pci1028,21e@1d,7/storage@7 Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /pci@0,0/pci1028,21e@1d,7/storage@7 (scsa2usb0) online using NTFS-3g $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 15867.8 s, 127 kB/s After reformating to UFS $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/ben/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 110.893 s, 18.2 MB/s Yeah, really, something is wrong with the implementation of FAT/NTFS on OpenIndiana. Would a more recent NTFS-3G help ? Currently using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE. Which version of ntfs-3g were you using and what are your mount options ? What is the output of ntfs-3g -help ? Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
I did some test today with another USB drive. Here are the results : From Linux (NTFS) $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/media/ben/MD/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 enregistrements lus 3948544+0 enregistrements écrits 2021654528 octets (2.0 GB) copiés, 91.5862 s, 22.1 MB/s From OI Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname usba: [ID 912658 kern.info] USB 2.0 device (usb5e3,702) operating at hi speed (USB 2.x) on USB 2.0 root hub: storage@7, scsa2usb0 at bus address 2 Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname usba: [ID 349649 kern.info] USB TO IDE Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] scsa2usb0 is /pci@0,0/pci1028,21e@1d,7/storage@7 Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /pci@0,0/pci1028,21e@1d,7/storage@7 (scsa2usb0) online using NTFS-3g $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 15867.8 s, 127 kB/s After reformating to UFS $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/ben/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 110.893 s, 18.2 MB/s Yeah, really, something is wrong with the implementation of FAT/NTFS on OpenIndiana. Would a more recent NTFS-3G help ? Currently using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE. Ben - Mail original - De: benta...@chez.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 16:24:44 Objet: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Thanks for the FAT trick. I don't remember when the disk used to be NTFS, 1 or 2 years ago. I had to reformat it for compatibility issues with shiny hardware I don't manage. I'll try to reformat it to NTFS and see how it goes. Best regards. Ben - Mail original - De: Aurélien Larcher aurelien.larc...@gmail.com À: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 16:08:25 Objet: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance I guess it depends which filesystem you are using, but for FAT yes definitely. Maybe just a matter of block size in this case. Also make sure that USB2 is actually used, I found Solaris/illumos to fallback to USB1 on several occasions. Aurélien À lun. juil. 27 06:00:21 2015 GMT+0200, benta...@chez.com a écrit : I redid the test, it is more around 30-35 MB/s on other OS's actually. - Mail original - De: benta...@chez.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 15:56:33 Objet: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Hi, I always found the performance of USB devices connected to OI behind other OS. Is it related to the implementation or is it just me (oi159a) ? For example, same drive transfer (one big file) is : - 8MB/s on OI - 45MB/s on Linux/Windows Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
Hi, There is indeed a much newer version of ntfs-3g on Jean-Pierre André's website: 2015.3.14AR.1. He posted very good results earlier this year. Having these in oi-userland is on the TODO list and would be great. Thanks for your report. Best, Aurélien À mar. juil. 28 04:08:00 2015 GMT+0200, benta...@chez.com a écrit : I did some test today with another USB drive. Here are the results : From Linux (NTFS) $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/media/ben/MD/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 enregistrements lus 3948544+0 enregistrements écrits 2021654528 octets (2.0 GB) copiés, 91.5862 s, 22.1 MB/s From OI Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname usba: [ID 912658 kern.info] USB 2.0 device (usb5e3,702) operating at hi speed (USB 2.x) on USB 2.0 root hub: storage@7, scsa2usb0 at bus address 2 Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname usba: [ID 349649 kern.info] USB TO IDE Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] scsa2usb0 is /pci@0,0/pci1028,21e@1d,7/storage@7 Jul 28 08:50:42 hostname genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /pci@0,0/pci1028,21e@1d,7/storage@7 (scsa2usb0) online using NTFS-3g $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 15867.8 s, 127 kB/s After reformating to UFS $ dd if=FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img of=/mnt/ben/FreeDOS-1.1-memstick-2-2048M.img 3948544+0 records in 3948544+0 records out 2021654528 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 110.893 s, 18.2 MB/s Yeah, really, something is wrong with the implementation of FAT/NTFS on OpenIndiana. Would a more recent NTFS-3G help ? Currently using 2012.1.15AR.8 from SFE. Ben - Mail original - De: benta...@chez.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 16:24:44 Objet: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Thanks for the FAT trick. I don't remember when the disk used to be NTFS, 1 or 2 years ago. I had to reformat it for compatibility issues with shiny hardware I don't manage. I'll try to reformat it to NTFS and see how it goes. Best regards. Ben - Mail original - De: Aurélien Larcher aurelien.larc...@gmail.com À: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 16:08:25 Objet: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance I guess it depends which filesystem you are using, but for FAT yes definitely. Maybe just a matter of block size in this case. Also make sure that USB2 is actually used, I found Solaris/illumos to fallback to USB1 on several occasions. Aurélien À lun. juil. 27 06:00:21 2015 GMT+0200, benta...@chez.com a écrit : I redid the test, it is more around 30-35 MB/s on other OS's actually. - Mail original - De: benta...@chez.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 15:56:33 Objet: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Hi, I always found the performance of USB devices connected to OI behind other OS. Is it related to the implementation or is it just me (oi159a) ? For example, same drive transfer (one big file) is : - 8MB/s on OI - 45MB/s on Linux/Windows Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
I redid the test, it is more around 30-35 MB/s on other OS's actually. - Mail original - De: benta...@chez.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 15:56:33 Objet: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Hi, I always found the performance of USB devices connected to OI behind other OS. Is it related to the implementation or is it just me (oi159a) ? For example, same drive transfer (one big file) is : - 8MB/s on OI - 45MB/s on Linux/Windows Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
Thanks for the FAT trick. I don't remember when the disk used to be NTFS, 1 or 2 years ago. I had to reformat it for compatibility issues with shiny hardware I don't manage. I'll try to reformat it to NTFS and see how it goes. Best regards. Ben - Mail original - De: Aurélien Larcher aurelien.larc...@gmail.com À: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 16:08:25 Objet: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance I guess it depends which filesystem you are using, but for FAT yes definitely. Maybe just a matter of block size in this case. Also make sure that USB2 is actually used, I found Solaris/illumos to fallback to USB1 on several occasions. Aurélien À lun. juil. 27 06:00:21 2015 GMT+0200, benta...@chez.com a écrit : I redid the test, it is more around 30-35 MB/s on other OS's actually. - Mail original - De: benta...@chez.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 15:56:33 Objet: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Hi, I always found the performance of USB devices connected to OI behind other OS. Is it related to the implementation or is it just me (oi159a) ? For example, same drive transfer (one big file) is : - 8MB/s on OI - 45MB/s on Linux/Windows Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance
I guess it depends which filesystem you are using, but for FAT yes definitely. Maybe just a matter of block size in this case. Also make sure that USB2 is actually used, I found Solaris/illumos to fallback to USB1 on several occasions. Aurélien À lun. juil. 27 06:00:21 2015 GMT+0200, benta...@chez.com a écrit : I redid the test, it is more around 30-35 MB/s on other OS's actually. - Mail original - De: benta...@chez.com À: Discussion list for OpenIndiana openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Envoyé: Lundi 27 Juillet 2015 15:56:33 Objet: [OpenIndiana-discuss] USB 2 performance Hi, I always found the performance of USB devices connected to OI behind other OS. Is it related to the implementation or is it just me (oi159a) ? For example, same drive transfer (one big file) is : - 8MB/s on OI - 45MB/s on Linux/Windows Ben ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
