Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
And USB 2.0 hard limit is 60MB/s. i have never seen USB 2.0 exceeding 35MB/s write and 40MB/s read. even when connecting SATA disk over USB-SATA bridge. 60MB/s is wire speed. USB have enormous protocol overhead. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
i have never seen USB 2.0 exceeding 35MB/s write and 40MB/s read. That means I essentially got what I wanted- as high read output as possible on USB 2.0. Thanks. Indeed 35MB/s-40MB/s is common reported maximum throughput. dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da0 bs=64k count=1 newfs_msdosfs /dev/da0 Apart from bs= that's exactly what I did (Well, there was one /dev/random/ run prior.) What I previously meant is that I had such pendrive, that without former formatting in Windows, didn't even show up as device in FreeBSD- was completely useless. That does not mean I didn't newfs_msdosfsed it after that in FreeBSD (worked perfectly fine since) :) -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/da0-40-000MB-s-transfers-What-was-rationale-behind-pegging-USB-2-0-at-40MB-s-tp5729028p5729143.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 03:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Jakub Lach articulated: What I previously meant is that I had such pendrive, that without former formatting in Windows, didn't even show up as device in FreeBSD- was completely useless. That does not mean I didn't newfs_msdosfsed it after that in FreeBSD (worked perfectly fine since) :) I experienced that phenomena of a drive not being recognized once also. However, after formatting it in Windows why duplicate it again in FreeBSD? It serves no purpose that I am aware of. By the way, it is too bad that FreeBSD is not able to take advantage of the exFat format like other distributions do. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ Paul Revere was a tattle-tale. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
However, after formatting it in Windows why duplicate it again in FreeBSD? Just to check if it works as should, also trim sectors and whatever. Format without partition table? But in this case, no 1 reason was probably most important. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/da0-40-000MB-s-transfers-What-was-rationale-behind-pegging-USB-2-0-at-40MB-s-tp5729028p5729157.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
However, after formatting it in Windows why duplicate it again in FreeBSD? It serves no purpose that I am aware of. By the way, it is too bad that FreeBSD is not able to take advantage of the exFat format fusefs-exfat in ports still i don't really care, i would reformat in as FAT32 anyway. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
Format without partition table? yes. Windows recognizes it properly except Win98/95 (which doesn't work with large USB drives anyway). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
What I previously meant is that I had such pendrive, that without former formatting in Windows, didn't even show up as device in FreeBSD- was completely useless. the result of XXI century way of programming - flash translator firmware in that case. They don't even read specs about USB storage, just it is fine if it works (seems to work) in windoze. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
Hi, On Monday 23 July 2012 17:48:50 Jerry wrote: On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 03:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Jakub Lach articulated: What I previously meant is that I had such pendrive, that without former formatting in Windows, didn't even show up as device in FreeBSD- was completely useless. That does not mean I didn't newfs_msdosfsed it after that in FreeBSD (worked perfectly fine since) :) I experienced that phenomena of a drive not being recognized once also. However, after formatting it in Windows why duplicate it again in FreeBSD? It serves no purpose that I am aware of. By the way, it is too bad that FreeBSD is not able to take advantage of the exFat format like other distributions do. isn't there support for it via fuse? Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
This could be deducted, but I will add for clarity, that I bought USB 3.0 pendrive to use in 2.0 port, to take advantage of 2.0 to the fullest (as 2.0 pendrives have slow flashes inside). -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/da0-40-000MB-s-transfers-What-was-rationale-behind-pegging-USB-2-0-at-40MB-s-tp5729028p5729030.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
which actually works with FreeBSD just ripped from package! (normal _empty_ FAT filesystem, no garbageware added, no need to format). zero difference. newfs_msdos take a moment. It actually bounces from 40MB/s limit when reading from it. Writing is about 18MB/s. Device is supposed to be 467x which should be about 70MB/s. don't treat all advertised data seriously And USB 2.0 hard limit is 60MB/s. Wouldn't be nice to squeeze few additional MB/s? how did you measured it. dd if=/dev/da0 of=/dev/null bs=64k ? dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da0 bs=64k via msdosfs via mtools ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
18MB/s write is figure from few dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da0 bs=1 to 15M runs, 13-14MB/s from actual files copied in mc to flash and 36-39MB/s file copied from flash to hdd in mc. dd if=/dev/da0 of=/dev/zero bs=15m gives 33MB/s read. Speaking of advertisements, yes I know but USB 3.0 drives with nice flashes are capable of speeds well above 2.0 limits, and that's the point anyway. Speaking of formatting, I can't agree, as I bought such awfully formatted drive, that it had to be FAT formatted in Windows to be even recognized in FreeBSD as device. And I don't usually have Windows around. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/da0-40-000MB-s-transfers-What-was-rationale-behind-pegging-USB-2-0-at-40MB-s-tp5729028p5729035.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Jakub Lach jakub_l...@mailplus.pl wrote: Hi, I was fortunate enough to buy USB 3.0 pendrive, which actually works with FreeBSD just ripped from package! (normal _empty_ FAT filesystem, no garbageware added, no need to format). It actually bounces from 40MB/s limit when reading from it. Writing is about 18MB/s. Device is supposed to be 467x which should be about 70MB/s. And USB 2.0 hard limit is 60MB/s. Wouldn't be nice to squeeze few additional MB/s? You are suffering a misunderstanding of how USB 2 works. There is a lot of overhead to it. If you want USB 3 speeds, buy a USB 3 controller. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
Speaking of misunderstanding, that's certainly possible. How much overhead is normal and alternatively, why in FreeBSD USB 2.0 reports as 40MB/s and not other arbitrary number. I hope I didn't sound like PLEASE HELP I WANT USB 3.0 SPEEDS ON USB 2.0... -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/da0-40-000MB-s-transfers-What-was-rationale-behind-pegging-USB-2-0-at-40MB-s-tp5729028p5729042.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Jakub Lach jakub_l...@mailplus.pl wrote: Speaking of misunderstanding, that's certainly possible. How much overhead is normal and alternatively, why in FreeBSD USB 2.0 reports as 40MB/s and not other arbitrary number. The overhead includes many different things including hardware latency. However the big one is USB communication itself. That is static, you can't change it and it doesn't vary(assuming same communication type). Your reported speeds are typical, and in all likelihood would be very similar under another OS. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers What was rationale behind pegging USB 2.0 at 40MB/s?
Apparently my speeds are pretty decent, as this this advertised speed relates to read speed, and write one is pretty weak. People are reporting 62-70MB/s read and 17-31MB/s write. Are you saying that disk clearly bumping from 40MB/s read barrier (as I saw in midnight commander is my imagination or it's cause is totally unrelated to OS? I thought it's worth investigating, as FreeBSD coincidentally reports USB 2.0 ports as such. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/da0-40-000MB-s-transfers-What-was-rationale-behind-pegging-USB-2-0-at-40MB-s-tp5729028p5729100.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
