blocksize when using dd to copy disks? bigger = better?

2008-09-23 Thread Joachim Rosenfeld
When mirroring a disk with dd, I notice that a blocksize of 512 runs awfully slow, but with bs=1MB (2^10bytes), it runs fairly quickly. Can someone explain the implications of this? Did all the data not copy properly with the larger blocksize? thanks Joe

Re: blocksize when using dd to copy disks? bigger = better?

2008-09-23 Thread Jerry McAllister
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 11:04:13AM -0400, Joachim Rosenfeld wrote: When mirroring a disk with dd, I notice that a blocksize of 512 runs awfully slow, but with bs=1MB (2^10bytes), it runs fairly quickly. Can someone explain the implications of this? Did all the data not copy properly with

Re: blocksize when using dd to copy disks? bigger = better?

2008-09-23 Thread RW
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:37:00 -0400 Jerry McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 11:04:13AM -0400, Joachim Rosenfeld wrote: When mirroring a disk with dd, I notice that a blocksize of 512 runs awfully slow, but with bs=1MB (2^10bytes), it runs fairly quickly. Can