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
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
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
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
-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
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
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
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
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
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
---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
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,
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
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...
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,
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 07:42, John Richard Smith wrote:
snipping the birds wings
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
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)
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
/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
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
43 matches
Mail list logo
