Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Dale wrote: > I am in the process of moving my OS from drive to drive and thought I would > test to see which drive is the fastest. I got some strange results when I > tested them One drive is MUCH slower than the others on the buffered disk > reads but I can't see any reason why that would be so. Check dmesg to see if the drives show any differences... If they are SATA drives check to see if there is a jumper which forces it into "compatibility" mode, slow mode, something like that... If they are SATA and you use an intel chipset motherboard check to be sure that the SATA header of that drive is set to AHCI and not IDE mode... Those are just ideas, things I have encountered. :)
Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Widdle and WDC WD10EARS-00Y5B1
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:35 AM, wrote: > > Hi, > > The WDC WD10EARS-00Y5B1 1TB "green" harddisk has an design flaw: > The heads are parked after a much too short time. Or in other words: > The designed maximum of head-park-cycles are reached much too fast. I have 2TB samsung drives which, by default, park heads very quickly. Using hdparm I changed power saving mode from "off" (which parks after a minute) to "254" and now the heads never park. (Different levels can give different results). Maybe your WD drive is similar.
[gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Hi folks, I am in the process of moving my OS from drive to drive and thought I would test to see which drive is the fastest. I got some strange results when I tested them One drive is MUCH slower than the others on the buffered disk reads but I can't see any reason why that would be so. This is the test results: smoker-new ~ # hdparm -Tt /dev/hda /dev/hda: Timing cached reads: 816 MB in 2.00 seconds = 407.41 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 172 MB in 3.03 seconds = 56.70 MB/sec smoker-new ~ # hdparm -Tt /dev/hdb /dev/hdb: Timing cached reads: 818 MB in 2.00 seconds = 408.77 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 38 MB in 3.03 seconds = 12.55 MB/sec smoker-new ~ # hdparm -Tt /dev/hdc /dev/hdc: Timing cached reads: 820 MB in 2.00 seconds = 409.93 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 170 MB in 3.03 seconds = 56.12 MB/sec smoker-new ~ # As you may be able to tell, hdb is really really slow. Well, they are all pretty slow but that one is a lot slower for some reason. This is the info from hdparm on each drive: Sorry so long but it may help. smoker-new ~ # hdparm -I /dev/hda /dev/hda: ATA device, with non-removable media Model Number: Maxtor 6E040L0 Serial Number: E15KS65E Firmware Revision: NAR61590 Standards: Used: ATA/ATAPI-7 T13 1532D revision 0 Supported: 7 6 5 4 Configuration: Logical max current cylinders 16383 16383 heads 16 16 sectors/track 63 63 -- CHS current addressable sectors: 16514064 LBAuser addressable sectors: 78156288 Logical/Physical Sector size: 512 bytes device size with M = 1024*1024: 38162 MBytes device size with M = 1000*1000: 40016 MBytes (40 GB) cache/buffer size = 2048 KBytes (type=DualPortCache) Capabilities: LBA, IORDY(can be disabled) Standby timer values: spec'd by Standard, no device specific minimum R/W multiple sector transfer: Max = 16 Current = 16 Advanced power management level: disabled Recommended acoustic management value: 192, current value: 254 DMA: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 udma5 *udma6 Cycle time: min=120ns recommended=120ns PIO: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4 Cycle time: no flow control=120ns IORDY flow control=120ns Commands/features: Enabled Supported: *SMART feature set Security Mode feature set *Power Management feature set *Write cache *Look-ahead *Host Protected Area feature set *WRITE_VERIFY command *WRITE_BUFFER command *READ_BUFFER command *NOP cmd *DOWNLOAD_MICROCODE Advanced Power Management feature set SET_MAX security extension *Automatic Acoustic Management feature set *Device Configuration Overlay feature set *Mandatory FLUSH_CACHE *FLUSH_CACHE_EXT *SMART error logging *SMART self-test Security: Master password revision code = 65534 supported not enabled not locked not frozen not expired: security count not supported: enhanced erase HW reset results: CBLID- above Vih Device num = 0 determined by the jumper Checksum: correct smoker-new ~ # hdparm -I /dev/hdb /dev/hdb: ATA device, with non-removable media Model Number: WDC WD800BB-00DKA0 Serial Number: WD-WCAHL2497094 Firmware Revision: 77.07W77 Standards: Supported: 6 5 4 Likely used: 6 Configuration: Logical max current cylinders 16383 16383 heads 16 16 sectors/track 63 63 -- CHS current addressable sectors: 16514064 LBAuser addressable sectors: 156301488 LBA48 user addressable sectors: 156301488 Logical/Physical Sector size: 512 bytes device size with M = 1024*1024: 76319 MBytes device size with M = 1000*1000: 80026 MBytes (80 GB) cache/buffer size = 2048 KBytes (type=DualPortCache) Capabilities: LBA, IORDY(can be disabled) Standby timer values: spec'd by Standard, with device specific minimum R/W multiple sector transfer: Max = 16 Current = 16 Recommended acoustic management value: 128, current value: 254 DMA: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5 Cycle time: min=120ns recommended=120ns PIO: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4 Cycle time: no flow control=120ns IORDY flow control=120ns Commands/features: Enabled Supported: *SMART fea
[gentoo-user] Re: {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
On 2010-06-01, Grant wrote: >> I don't have any experience with DD-WRT. ?I use OpenWrt, but have >> only used it in "normal" bridges and WAPs. > > Sorry to be getting even more OT, but why did you choose OpenWRT over > DD-WRT? I didn't know there was more than one choice available. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wireless_router_firmware_projects When I made the choice it was for several reasons: * OpenWrt supported a lot more platforms than DD-Wrt. * OpenWrt is open-source where DD-Wrt isn't. * DD-Wrt is a closed project with a developer that isn't interested in working with outsiders, while OpenWrt is much more community-oriented and works with other groups of developers like XWrt. www.openwrt.org www.xwrt.org -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo desktop attaches to my TV. ?I'm using a small wireless router to send the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for only firewall/router duties. ?Am I overlooking another option? ?I want a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the room to the other. >>> >>> Usually that's called a "cable". ?;) >>> >>> Many wireless bridges have a "virtual cable" mode point-to-point >>> bridging mode that will let you pair them together so that they won't >>> talk to anything else and are just transparent layer 2 bridges. ?I've >>> got some DLink bridges that have a mode like that. ?You just set them >>> up next to each other and powered them both up while holding a button >>> down, and they'd find each other and pair-up. >> >> I hadn't heard of a wireless bridge before. That sounds about right. >> DD-WRT running as a wireless bridge wouldn't be so bad right? > > I don't have any experience with DD-WRT. I use OpenWrt, but have > only used it in "normal" bridges and WAPs. Sorry to be getting even more OT, but why did you choose OpenWRT over DD-WRT? I didn't know there was more than one choice available. - Grant > By a "normal" bridge, I mean one that's running in infrastructure mode > talking to a WAP using the normal WEP and WAP authentication (the WAP > also happened to be running OpenWrt). > > For a simple point-to-point link you may want to try ad-hoc mode > instead of infrastrucure mode.
[gentoo-user] Re: {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
On 2010-06-01, Grant wrote: >>> My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo >>> desktop attaches to my TV. ?I'm using a small wireless router to send >>> the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. >>> I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, >>> but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for >>> only firewall/router duties. ?Am I overlooking another option? ?I want >>> a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the >>> room to the other. >> >> Usually that's called a "cable". ?;) >> >> Many wireless bridges have a "virtual cable" mode point-to-point >> bridging mode that will let you pair them together so that they won't >> talk to anything else and are just transparent layer 2 bridges. ?I've >> got some DLink bridges that have a mode like that. ?You just set them >> up next to each other and powered them both up while holding a button >> down, and they'd find each other and pair-up. > > I hadn't heard of a wireless bridge before. That sounds about right. > DD-WRT running as a wireless bridge wouldn't be so bad right? I don't have any experience with DD-WRT. I use OpenWrt, but have only used it in "normal" bridges and WAPs. By a "normal" bridge, I mean one that's running in infrastructure mode talking to a WAP using the normal WEP and WAP authentication (the WAP also happened to be running OpenWrt). For a simple point-to-point link you may want to try ad-hoc mode instead of infrastrucure mode. -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
>>> My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo >>> desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send >>> the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. >>> I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, > [...] > >> You could use a pair of powerline adaptors to route the ethernet across >> the mains wiring. I use them for my MythTV front end, because SWMBO would >> go apeshit if I tried running ethernet cables through the living room. > > Do those not count as "non-Gentoo decision-making devices"? When I said I didn't like to use non-Gentoo decision-making devices, I was just trying to let everyone in on my mentality. It would be ideal, but of course it means building and maintaining another Gentoo system and I always seem to be short on time as it is. - Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
>> My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo >> desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send >> the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. >> I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, >> but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for >> only firewall/router duties. Am I overlooking another option? I want >> a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the >> room to the other. > > Usually that's called a "cable". ;) > > Many wireless bridges have a "virtual cable" mode point-to-point > bridging mode that will let you pair them together so that they won't > talk to anything else and are just transparent layer 2 bridges. I've > got some DLink bridges that have a mode like that. You just set them > up next to each other and powered them both up while holding a button > down, and they'd find each other and pair-up. I hadn't heard of a wireless bridge before. That sounds about right. DD-WRT running as a wireless bridge wouldn't be so bad right? - Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
>> My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo >> desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send >> the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. >> I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, >> but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for >> only firewall/router duties. Am I overlooking another option? I want >> a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the >> room to the other. > > You could use a pair of powerline adaptors to route the ethernet across > the mains wiring. I use them for my MythTV front end, because SWMBO would > go apeshit if I tried running ethernet cables through the living room. I thought about that, and it would be perfect except that I'm really into audio and I don't want to increase the interference in my apartment's electricity. - Grant
[gentoo-user] Re: {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
On 2010-05-31, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:19:40 -0700, Grant wrote: > >> My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo >> desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send >> the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. >> I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, [...] > You could use a pair of powerline adaptors to route the ethernet across > the mains wiring. I use them for my MythTV front end, because SWMBO would > go apeshit if I tried running ethernet cables through the living room. Do those not count as "non-Gentoo decision-making devices"? -- Grant
[gentoo-user] Re: {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
On 2010-05-31, Grant wrote: > My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo > desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send > the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. > I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, > but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for > only firewall/router duties. Am I overlooking another option? I want > a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the > room to the other. Usually that's called a "cable". ;) Many wireless bridges have a "virtual cable" mode point-to-point bridging mode that will let you pair them together so that they won't talk to anything else and are just transparent layer 2 bridges. I've got some DLink bridges that have a mode like that. You just set them up next to each other and powered them both up while holding a button down, and they'd find each other and pair-up. Many OTS WAPs also have a point-to-point bridge mode as well. Unfortunately all of the WAPs and bridges that I know of are "non-Gentoo" devices, so they don't meet your stated requiremnt of having to run Gentoo. If you really want something that runs Gentoo, then I don't see any way around building the two bridge units yourself. -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:19:40 -0700, Grant wrote: > My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo > desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send > the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. > I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, > but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for > only firewall/router duties. Am I overlooking another option? I want > a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the > room to the other. You could use a pair of powerline adaptors to route the ethernet across the mains wiring. I use them for my MythTV front end, because SWMBO would go apeshit if I tried running ethernet cables through the living room. -- Neil Bothwick We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
You mean a long ethernet cable? On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Grant wrote: > My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo > desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send > the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. > I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, > but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for > only firewall/router duties. Am I overlooking another option? I want > a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the > room to the other. > > There may not be anything like that. I just thought I'd ask. > > - Grant > >
[gentoo-user] {OT} "dumb" ethernet mover
My cable internet outlet is across the room from my TV, and my Gentoo desktop attaches to my TV. I'm using a small wireless router to send the signal from the cable modem to my Gentoo system across the room. I don't like using a non-Gentoo decision-making device in my network, but I also don't want to build and maintain another Gentoo system for only firewall/router duties. Am I overlooking another option? I want a "dumb" device to move the ethernet connection from one side of the room to the other. There may not be anything like that. I just thought I'd ask. - Grant
[gentoo-user] OT: Widdle and WDC WD10EARS-00Y5B1
Hi, The WDC WD10EARS-00Y5B1 1TB "green" harddisk has an design flaw: The heads are parked after a much too short time. Or in other words: The designed maximum of head-park-cycles are reached much too fast. WD has offered a tool called widdle, which seem to modify the timer settings of that part of the firmware, which is responsible for the parking of the heads. Has somewhere out there applied widdle to a WDC WD10EARS-00Y5B1 1TB harddisk with success with -for example- a freedos bootdisk? Thank you very much in advance for any help and info! Best regards, mcc -- Please don't send me any Word- or Powerpoint-Attachments unless it's absolutely neccessary. - Send simply Text. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html In a world without fences and walls nobody needs gates and windows.
[gentoo-user] Re: rsync to a USB stick
On 2010-05-31, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sun, 30 May 2010 14:20:36 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: > >> > You're assuming that each backup only writes once, which is far from >> > true. If you mount a drive with the sync option, the FAT is updated >> > for every block you write, so even a single file can cause thousands >> > of writes to the same location. >> >> And you're assuming that the flash controller chip in the USB drive >> doesn't do wear-leavelling. > > Even with wear levelling, writing in sync mode still does thousands of > writes. They may be more spread out, but there are still a lot more than > one per day and the previous assumptions are still false. Agreed. Sync writes will definitely wear out flash sooner, but it's not as bad as one might think since flash controller chips _generally_ do wear levelling and may even do bad-block management that will swap in spare blocks when wornw blocks start to go bad. Of couse, none of the USB thumb-drive vendors will ever spec any of that, so you have no way of actually knowing. -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: rsync to a USB stick
On Sun, 30 May 2010 14:20:36 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: > > You're assuming that each backup only writes once, which is far from > > true. If you mount a drive with the sync option, the FAT is updated > > for every block you write, so even a single file can cause thousands > > of writes to the same location. > > And you're assuming that the flash controller chip in the USB drive > doesn't do wear-leavelling. Even with wear levelling, writing in sync mode still does thousands of writes. They may be more spread out, but there are still a lot more than one per day and the previous assumptions are still false. -- Neil Bothwick Law of Mechanical Repair: After your hands become coated with grease, your nose will begin to itch. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
