Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Dale wrote: It hasn't mattered in the past. I'm not sure why it should matter now. I really don't see how it could matter at all really. Heck, my DVD drive is slow as it gets, its udma4, but hdc is on the same cable and it is one of the faster drives I have. That would exclude sda of course. Those two drives has been in there this way for ages and used to be pretty close as far as speed. I'm thinking age is catching up on the drive myself. Dale :-) :-) Just a update on this drive: r...@smoker-new-hda / # /root/hdparm Thu Jul 1 15:16:25 CDT 2010 /dev/hda: Timing cached reads: 780 MB in 2.00 seconds = 389.91 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 170 MB in 3.01 seconds = 56.43 MB/sec /dev/hdb: Timing cached reads: 772 MB in 2.00 seconds = 385.42 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 14 MB in 3.08 seconds = 4.55 MB/sec /dev/hdc: Timing cached reads: 774 MB in 2.00 seconds = 386.48 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 168 MB in 3.01 seconds = 55.80 MB/sec /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 790 MB in 2.00 seconds = 394.72 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 228 MB in 3.01 seconds = 75.86 MB/sec r...@smoker-new-hda / # It appears that hdb is on the way out. I think it is packing its bags. 4.55MB/sec is getting pretty slow. That is on par with the drives that were made 15 or 20 years ago. I guess the next time I have the rig turned off, I need to move hdc down to hdb's spot and bolt her down. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Robert Bridge wrote: On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Dale wrote: The powered on hours is most likely about right. I rarely turn my machine off. That drive is about that old too. I don't always have it mounted but it is a pain to remove so I just left it in there in case I needed it. Is it a WD Caviar Black by any chance? I have vague memories of seeing something saying they don't power off in firmware if unused... Anyway, those UDMA errors are a bigger problem I suspect, as they will slow things down as the disk has to recover from the errors. Are you seeing any of the numbers change as you leave it running? RobbieAB Right now its not even in use. It's not mounted or anything but it is getting power. I was using a week or so ago for /var and something else. I can't recall at the moment. I'm not sure if I am going to us it anymore or not. If it stays this slow, I know I'm not. lol Got to love newegg for this part. This is a link to the drive. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822144102 Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Dale wrote: > The powered on hours is most likely about right. I rarely turn my machine > off. That drive is about that old too. I don't always have it mounted but > it is a pain to remove so I just left it in there in case I needed it. Is it a WD Caviar Black by any chance? I have vague memories of seeing something saying they don't power off in firmware if unused... Anyway, those UDMA errors are a bigger problem I suspect, as they will slow things down as the disk has to recover from the errors. Are you seeing any of the numbers change as you leave it running? RobbieAB
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Alex Schuster wrote: Dale writes: For the record, hda and hdb are not even mounted. I am currently using hdc for the OS. The drive used to be a lot faster than this. I used it for my OS a good while back and recently used it for /var/portage and /usr/portage. I'm not sure what has changed so I can't figure out why it is so slow. Anyone see something I am missing? All I see is the others are udma6 while it is udma5. It has always been that way tho. Thoughts? hdb is in slave mode, maybe this slows things down? If you want to be sure, you could exchange hda and hdb (that is, exchange a jumper so master becomes slave and vice versa, unless you have it set to 'cable select'), and check again. Wonko It hasn't mattered in the past. I'm not sure why it should matter now. I really don't see how it could matter at all really. Heck, my DVD drive is slow as it gets, its udma4, but hdc is on the same cable and it is one of the faster drives I have. That would exclude sda of course. Those two drives has been in there this way for ages and used to be pretty close as far as speed. I'm thinking age is catching up on the drive myself. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Dale writes: > For the record, hda and hdb are not even mounted. I am currently using > hdc for the OS. The drive used to be a lot faster than this. I used > it for my OS a good while back and recently used it for /var/portage > and /usr/portage. I'm not sure what has changed so I can't figure out > why it is so slow. Anyone see something I am missing? All I see is > the others are udma6 while it is udma5. It has always been that way > tho. > > Thoughts? hdb is in slave mode, maybe this slows things down? If you want to be sure, you could exchange hda and hdb (that is, exchange a jumper so master becomes slave and vice versa, unless you have it set to 'cable select'), and check again. Wonko
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Robert Bridge wrote: Hi Dale, > From the above, the reallocated sector count is fine, none of the disk seem to be having surface problems. The UDMA errors are MUCH higher for sdb, as is the power-on hours. It is claiming about 6 years powered on, which is a bit weird alright. If it is having to recover UDMA errors, it will be much slower to operate. Cheers, RobbieAB The powered on hours is most likely about right. I rarely turn my machine off. That drive is about that old too. I don't always have it mounted but it is a pain to remove so I just left it in there in case I needed it. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Hi Dale, On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Dale wrote: > > Here is that info. I included all the IDE drives. Sort of see if there is > something different about them. > > smoker-new ~ # smartctl -A /dev/hda > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 253 253 063 Pre-fail Always > - 0 > 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000a 253 252 000 Old_age Always > - 0 > 9 Power_On_Minutes 0x0032 210 210 000 Old_age Always > - 1025h+05m > 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x0008 199 196 000 Old_age Offline > - 3 > > smoker-new ~ # smartctl -A /dev/hdb > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 200 200 140 Pre-fail Always > - 0 > 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000b 200 200 051 Pre-fail Always > - 0 > 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 032 032 000 Old_age Always > - 50209 > 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x000a 200 253 000 Old_age Always > - 1155 > > smoker-new ~ # smartctl -A /dev/hdc > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 253 253 063 Pre-fail Always > - 0 > 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000a 253 252 000 Old_age Always > - 0 > 9 Power_On_Minutes 0x0032 134 134 000 Old_age Always > - 1004h+16m > 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x0008 199 193 000 Old_age Offline > - 6 >From the above, the reallocated sector count is fine, none of the disk seem to be having surface problems. The UDMA errors are MUCH higher for sdb, as is the power-on hours. It is claiming about 6 years powered on, which is a bit weird alright. If it is having to recover UDMA errors, it will be much slower to operate. Cheers, RobbieAB
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
KH wrote: Am 03.06.2010 06:46, schrieb Dale: As for the lifetimes in the report, good question. I think that drives is doing some weird stuff. It can travel back and forth in time but is slow for no apparent good reason. Dale :-) :-) Hi Dale, you just made me smile. Thank's. kh It does sort of have some irony to it doesn't it? Maybe it has a flux capacitor or something. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Am 03.06.2010 06:46, schrieb Dale: > > As for the lifetimes in the report, good question. I think that drives > is doing some weird stuff. It can travel back and forth in time but is > slow for no apparent good reason. > > Dale > > :-) :-) > Hi Dale, you just made me smile. Thank's. kh
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Arttu V. wrote: On 6/2/10, Dale wrote: smoker-new ~ # smartctl -l selftest /dev/hdb smartctl version 5.38 [i686-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 1038 - # 2 Short offline Completed without error 00% 1037 - # 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 1075 - # 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 305 - # 5 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 660 - # 6 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 213 - # 7 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 687 - # 8 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 686 - # 9 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 629 - I was thinking about smartctl -A attributes table (or just plain -a for all), which might've showed a great number of sector relocations or other internal I/O-related issues. But this report raises another question: why aren't the reported lifetimes in an ascending list? They jump back and forth. Here is that info. I included all the IDE drives. Sort of see if there is something different about them. smoker-new ~ # smartctl -A /dev/hda smartctl version 5.38 [i686-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 3 Spin_Up_Time0x0027 220 219 063Pre-fail Always - 11725 4 Start_Stop_Count0x0032 253 253 000Old_age Always - 1385 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 253 253 063Pre-fail Always - 0 6 Read_Channel_Margin 0x0001 253 253 100Pre-fail Offline - 0 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 8 Seek_Time_Performance 0x0027 251 240 187Pre-fail Always - 39290 9 Power_On_Minutes0x0032 210 210 000Old_age Always - 1025h+05m 10 Spin_Retry_Count0x002b 253 252 157Pre-fail Always - 0 11 Calibration_Retry_Count 0x002b 253 252 223Pre-fail Always - 0 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 250 250 000Old_age Always - 1396 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 253 253 000Old_age Always - 428 193 Load_Cycle_Count0x0032 253 253 000Old_age Always - 2071 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0032 253 253 000Old_age Always - 22 195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered 0x000a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 2566 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0008 253 253 000Old_age Offline - 0 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0008 253 253 000Old_age Offline - 0 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0008 253 253 000Old_age Offline - 0 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count0x0008 199 196 000Old_age Offline - 3 200 Multi_Zone_Error_Rate 0x000a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 201 Soft_Read_Error_Rate0x000a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 202 TA_Increase_Count 0x000a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 203 Run_Out_Cancel 0x000b 253 252 180Pre-fail Always - 0 204 Shock_Count_Write_Opern 0x000a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 205 Shock_Rate_Write_Opern 0x000a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 207 Spin_High_Current 0x002a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 208 Spin_Buzz 0x002a 253 252 000Old_age Always - 0 209 Offline_Seek_Performnce 0x0024 190 187 000Old_age Offline - 0 99 Unknown_Attribute 0x0004 253 253 000Old_age Offline - 0 100 Unknown_Attribute 0x0004 253 253 000Old_age Offline - 0 101 Unknown_Attribute 0x0004 253 253 000Old_age Offline - 0 smoker-new ~ # smartctl -A /dev/hdb smartctl version 5.38 [i686-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE U
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
On 6/2/10, Dale wrote: > smoker-new ~ # smartctl -l selftest /dev/hdb > smartctl version 5.38 [i686-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen > Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ > > === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === > SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 > Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining > LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error > # 1 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 1038 - > # 2 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 1037 - > # 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 1075 - > # 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 305 - > # 5 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 660 - > # 6 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 213 - > # 7 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 687 - > # 8 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 686 - > # 9 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% > 629 - I was thinking about smartctl -A attributes table (or just plain -a for all), which might've showed a great number of sector relocations or other internal I/O-related issues. But this report raises another question: why aren't the reported lifetimes in an ascending list? They jump back and forth. -- Arttu V.
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Arttu V. wrote: On 6/1/10, Dale wrote: /dev/hdb: Commands/features: Enabled Supported: *SMART feature set Maybe the problem is not external (cabling, jumpers etc), but internal? Anything interesting in smartctl's report? I did a test a few weeks ago and it worked fine. It passed and I didn't see any errors or anything "odd". I did the long test. I actualy ran it on all the drives, except the DVD of course, and they all passed. I just thought of something, it keeps those records. Here is the results: smoker-new ~ # smartctl -l selftest /dev/hda smartctl version 5.38 [i686-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 12210 - # 2 Short offline Completed without error 00% 12209 - # 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 8869 - # 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 5040 - # 5 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 4614 - # 6 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 4022 - # 7 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 4021 - # 8 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 3965 - # 9 Short offline Completed without error 00% 3965 - smoker-new ~ # smartctl -l selftest /dev/hdb smartctl version 5.38 [i686-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 1038 - # 2 Short offline Completed without error 00% 1037 - # 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 1075 - # 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 305 - # 5 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 660 - # 6 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 213 - # 7 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 687 - # 8 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 686 - # 9 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 629 - smoker-new ~ # smartctl -l selftest /dev/hdc smartctl version 5.38 [i686-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 37517 - # 2 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 28607 - # 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 24777 - # 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 24351 - # 5 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 23759 - # 6 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 23758 - # 7 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 23702 - smoker-new ~ # I don't know what else to check. Everything seems to be working but it is slow as it can get. More ideas I hope. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
On 6/1/10, Dale wrote: > /dev/hdb: > Commands/features: > Enabled Supported: > *SMART feature set Maybe the problem is not external (cabling, jumpers etc), but internal? Anything interesting in smartctl's report? -- Arttu V.
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
YoYo Siska wrote: On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 04:26:55AM -0500, Dale wrote: Paul Hartman wrote: 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. :) This is from dmesg: smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hda hda: Maxtor 6E040L0, ATA DISK drive hda: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 hda: UDMA/133 mode selected hda: max request size: 128KiB hda: 78156288 sectors (40016 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63 hda: cache flushes supported hda: hda1 hda2< hda5 hda6 hda7 hda8 hda9 hda10> smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hdb hdb: WDC WD800BB-00DKA0, ATA DISK drive hdb: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 hdb: UDMA/100 mode selected hdb: max request size: 512KiB hdb: 156301488 sectors (80026 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=16383/255/63 hdb: cache flushes supported hdb: hdb1 hdb2< hdb5> smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hdc hdc: Maxtor 6Y080P0, ATA DISK drive hdc: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 hdc: UDMA/133 mode selected hdc: max request size: 128KiB hdc: 160086528 sectors (81964 MB) w/7936KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63 hdc: cache flushes supported hdc: hdc1 hdc2< hdc5 hdc6 hdc7> REISERFS (device hdc6): found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal REISERFS (device hdc6): using ordered data mode REISERFS (device hdc6): journal params: device hdc6, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30 REISERFS (device hdc6): checking transaction log (hdc6) REISERFS (device hdc6): Using r5 hash to sort names REISERFS (device hdc7): found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal REISERFS (device hdc7): using ordered data mode REISERFS (device hdc7): journal params: device hdc7, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30 REISERFS (device hdc7): checking transaction log (hdc7) REISERFS (device hdc7): Using r5 hash to sort names Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k smoker-new ~ # It appears that hdb is using UDMA/100 but it has always done that. It's a older drive. This drive used to get somewhere in the 40Mb/sec range tho. I want to say it used to be about 47Mb/sec or so. All three of those drives are ATA. I have a SATA drive but I didn't list it since it is working good and fast all things considered. It's hooked to a PCI card. Thoughts? just a quess, did you use 80 or 40 wire ata cable for that disk? yoyo That would be a good call. The slow drive is on the same cable as hda. It is a 80 wire cable tho. The hdc drive is on the same cable as my DVD burner which is hdd. Also, I always check to make sure the jumpers are right too. One is set to master and one to slave. BIOS also reports the drives correctly as well. I do have a SATA controller with a 750Gb drive. I wouldn't think it would affect anything but it is the only change that has been made. Weird huh? I don't see anything that would cause this either but something is. Keep those thoughts coming tho. We need a few more. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 04:26:55AM -0500, Dale wrote: > Paul Hartman wrote: >> 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. :) >> >> > > This is from dmesg: > > smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hda > hda: Maxtor 6E040L0, ATA DISK drive > hda: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 > hda: UDMA/133 mode selected > hda: max request size: 128KiB > hda: 78156288 sectors (40016 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63 > hda: cache flushes supported > hda: hda1 hda2 < hda5 hda6 hda7 hda8 hda9 hda10 > > smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hdb > hdb: WDC WD800BB-00DKA0, ATA DISK drive > hdb: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 > hdb: UDMA/100 mode selected > hdb: max request size: 512KiB > hdb: 156301488 sectors (80026 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=16383/255/63 > hdb: cache flushes supported > hdb: hdb1 hdb2 < hdb5 > > smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hdc > hdc: Maxtor 6Y080P0, ATA DISK drive > hdc: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 > hdc: UDMA/133 mode selected > hdc: max request size: 128KiB > hdc: 160086528 sectors (81964 MB) w/7936KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63 > hdc: cache flushes supported > hdc: hdc1 hdc2 < hdc5 hdc6 hdc7 > > REISERFS (device hdc6): found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal > REISERFS (device hdc6): using ordered data mode > REISERFS (device hdc6): journal params: device hdc6, size 8192, journal > first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, > max trans age 30 > REISERFS (device hdc6): checking transaction log (hdc6) > REISERFS (device hdc6): Using r5 hash to sort names > REISERFS (device hdc7): found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal > REISERFS (device hdc7): using ordered data mode > REISERFS (device hdc7): journal params: device hdc7, size 8192, journal > first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, > max trans age 30 > REISERFS (device hdc7): checking transaction log (hdc7) > REISERFS (device hdc7): Using r5 hash to sort names > Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k > Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k > Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k > Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k > smoker-new ~ # > > It appears that hdb is using UDMA/100 but it has always done that. It's > a older drive. This drive used to get somewhere in the 40Mb/sec range > tho. I want to say it used to be about 47Mb/sec or so. > > All three of those drives are ATA. I have a SATA drive but I didn't > list it since it is working good and fast all things considered. It's > hooked to a PCI card. > > Thoughts? > just a quess, did you use 80 or 40 wire ata cable for that disk? yoyo
Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason.
Paul Hartman wrote: 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. :) This is from dmesg: smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hda hda: Maxtor 6E040L0, ATA DISK drive hda: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 hda: UDMA/133 mode selected hda: max request size: 128KiB hda: 78156288 sectors (40016 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63 hda: cache flushes supported hda: hda1 hda2 < hda5 hda6 hda7 hda8 hda9 hda10 > smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hdb hdb: WDC WD800BB-00DKA0, ATA DISK drive hdb: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 hdb: UDMA/100 mode selected hdb: max request size: 512KiB hdb: 156301488 sectors (80026 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=16383/255/63 hdb: cache flushes supported hdb: hdb1 hdb2 < hdb5 > smoker-new ~ # dmesg | grep hdc hdc: Maxtor 6Y080P0, ATA DISK drive hdc: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 hdc: UDMA/133 mode selected hdc: max request size: 128KiB hdc: 160086528 sectors (81964 MB) w/7936KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63 hdc: cache flushes supported hdc: hdc1 hdc2 < hdc5 hdc6 hdc7 > REISERFS (device hdc6): found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal REISERFS (device hdc6): using ordered data mode REISERFS (device hdc6): journal params: device hdc6, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30 REISERFS (device hdc6): checking transaction log (hdc6) REISERFS (device hdc6): Using r5 hash to sort names REISERFS (device hdc7): found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal REISERFS (device hdc7): using ordered data mode REISERFS (device hdc7): journal params: device hdc7, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30 REISERFS (device hdc7): checking transaction log (hdc7) REISERFS (device hdc7): Using r5 hash to sort names Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k Adding 976712k swap on /dev/hdc5. Priority:-1 extents:1 across:976712k smoker-new ~ # It appears that hdb is using UDMA/100 but it has always done that. It's a older drive. This drive used to get somewhere in the 40Mb/sec range tho. I want to say it used to be about 47Mb/sec or so. All three of those drives are ATA. I have a SATA drive but I didn't list it since it is working good and fast all things considered. It's hooked to a PCI card. Thoughts? Dale :-) :-)
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. :)
[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
