/dev/hda:

Model=FUJITSU MPF3153AT, FwRev=0028, SerialNo=05028947
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=4
BuffType=unknown, BuffSize=512kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=30023280
IORDY=yes, tPIO={min:240,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 *udma4
AdvancedPM=yes: disabled (255) WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: ATA/ATAPI-5 T13 1321D revision 1: 1 2 3 4 5

Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.79 seconds = 22.94 MB/sec

Actaully, we just made this a STORAGE thread. Part of what I have been trying to bring up is that data integrity is a large and important part of storage as well as pure speed. There needs to be a balance between speed and reliability. I lean toward reliability.

I use 12X 700 MB CD-RW burns after tarring to HD at night(the CD-RWs are about $1.25 each, and tar or tar.gz or tar.gz2 or bz2 can be pretty good. I do not need to wait for a live archive-and-burn. Look, for yourself, at BRU Personal and the Mandrake Backup module in the Mandrake Control Center in Mandrake 9.0 if you have that. Or, look at Gnu.org in the manual section. The tarring can be batched, the CD burning done later. If I am in a rush, I use CD-Rs for a full set burned at say 24X (I usually have time to burn at 20X and Mandakre using GCombust or Eroaster does do this well with my TDK 40X12X40 drive.) So, one answer might be a faster TDK or Sony CD-RW drive and fast media also.

So, I buy reliable and durable HDs with 3 Year warranties and known that they are usually going to manufacture for 4 year relaibility to avoid Warranty costs if they offer a 3 year warranty. I use WD because have used them since the 80's (they were called Western Digital BEFORE they reformed the company after going bankrupt by being overly lenient with returns in part also). If you wonder, I used my first closet-sized box in 1969 (not anything like what you woudl think of as a modern computer), so although I am relatively new to Linux I am not new to computing.

Thanks for the Birthday greeting, I am 49.

John.

--
The impossible can take almost eternity to accomplish. What is possible is much more than we now think is possible.

Well Mine is:

hda = IBM 7200 20GB

64MB in 2.30 Sec = 27.83 Mb/s

hdc = IBM 7200 40GB

64MB in 2.86 Sec = 22.38 Mb/s

This looks reasonable-- a read buffer that is large ont he HD helps to a degree, also you might try a

hdparm -d1 /dev/hda

and a

hdparm -d1 /dev/hdc

If you are adventurous, and are familiar with rewriting /etc/fstab and /etc/mtab and know how to make lilo update itself after doing this you might try running both the HDs on Primary IDE as hda and hdb and they might run faster than if each was sharing a Primary and\or Secondary bus with somethined a lot slower like a burner or CD-R or IDE Zip or other IDE Magento\Optical drive. i would leave the hda alone, change the hdc to hdb (move to primary cable) and edit the files listed above BEFORE doing the move. you will then need to boot in rescue from CD or floppy (read up on this, please, FIRST) and then run Lilo to force it to update so you can then boot nromally again. Essentially, every drive that moves gets its entriees changed-- so if hdc bacame hdb you would edit the files I listed and change every instance of hdc to hdb.

Good luck, please ask for help if unsure about anything before trying this last set of things related to moving the drive connection.

John.

Maxtor 7200RPM 30G UATA133
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.29 seconds = 49.65 MB/sec

Very good.

John,

I don't want to sound like I am picking on you but, I have not found the information you provided in post #214 to be true. I took the time to move my cd rom to the secondard controller thinking that my two harddrives would perform better.

It just didn't happen. The numbers were the same. I don't understand it......I assumed the numbers would be better but they did not. Don't misunderstand me, I am very happy with the performance of my drives, but my thinking was that if they could get better than why not.

My throughput is in the mid to upper 40's and that did not change when moved my cdrom.

Do you have any ideas on why that might be?

[I suspect that slower machines would get increases in performance. I know poeple that got night and day type of increases, but they were running with way lessspeed (500mhz vs 1.5??ghz) and way less ram (256mb vs 1gb) than I run with. ]

-Derrick

Since the reply was to awtok and applied to his situation, I am not surprised that you, with your very different box, had radically different results. Your system obviously has HD\IDE controller or controllers that do not prioriize one channel over another. His might not have, and with the older HDs he had (which I figured out from performance and other posts) it was possible (LIKELY, in fact)he also had an older controller chip that favored the Primary channel over the Secondary channel.

I am not picking on you either, but what I said, as with most hardware things, was suited for and true to the machine I was talking about in reply 214 to message 213-- and not universal.

With hard drives, the CLOSEST thing to being universal is that Linux accesses IDE\ATA hard drives better as a DMA access than as a non-DMA because of the way the kernel handles module switching. DMA is handled mostly as a real-time thing, and non-DMA can be pended with delays that result in not only slow writes from time told to write but also data loss if the machine crashes with things buffered but not written.

The following factors also can vary from box to box:

Whether or not the controller runs the whole channel at the speed of the slower drive(older ones), or runs each drive at native speed and does not care about relative speeds(the newest ones).

Whether or not the HDs obey the controller's signals to slow down (older IBMs tend to, newer Maxtors tend NOT to listen to such unless forced to with a utility run).

Sometimes you get a controller that runs the whole channel at one speed and a HD that insists on native. Then, you can have a long-term mess with data loss as tehcontroller will not be ready to pass data at the speed the HD is sending it if the HD is running faster than the controller wants it to run (controller on mobo, not the chip on the HD itself).

That is a tiny part of why the infamous YMMV should always be included in posts or be assumed to be present with Hardware issues.

John.

Box:
PII 350
hda - Western Digital 13200

Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.26 seconds = 12.16 MB/sec

not bad for an old HD i got for free after my other one burned out!
The HD burnout enabled me to buy my wife and kids a new windows box and I got to play with this one and install RH8!

Best thing that ever happened!
I also have a really old Quantam Bigfoot 5.25 3.2 gig I'll be installing(freebe)
I'll see how that one performs
commuter

The Bigfoot might be both newer and faster than the WD. It was built with bigger platters, but made fairly recently.

Good luck, I think the WD is a UDMA\33 HD, and if I am right about that the speeds are decent for that drive.

John.

/dev/sda:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.35 seconds = 47.28 MB/sec

18GB 10K RPM Ultra 160 SCSI Hard Drive ( PN: 9F653 )
It came in my Dell PowerEdge 1400SC server.

Mandrake 9.0 provided by Affero, LQ, and you.

Install image for hpt370 by sharky



[root@firedragon root]# hdparm -tT /dev/sda5

/dev/sda5:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.35 seconds =365.71 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 0.88 seconds = 72.73 MB/sec

Thanks for the tips John.
I installed the Bigfoot, RH8 recognized it as /dev/hdb .
When i tried to run fdisk the drive spun quite a few times and sounded absolutely terrible and then i got a message fdisk could not read /dev/hdb,
I think it's shot!

I then installed a 6gig Fujitsu I thought was bad (he,he) and set it up!
After turning on 32 bit I/O and DMA here's what I got!

/dev/hdb:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.45 seconds = 11.75 MB/sec

I can live with that, here is my first drive

/dev/hda
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.26 seconds = 12.16 MB/sec

thanks John and all the members this place rocks!

I just want to say I've answered dozens of questions just by using the search
and related thread functions! Great site guys

commuter

Sorry about the bigfoot. Happy the fujitsu worked.

John.

Thx, U should see it it looks a little funny sitting in the bottom 5.25" drive bay but thats the only way the double IDE cable would reach LOL.
I relocated /dev/hda to the top 4" drive bay and the cable now works but looks hysterical but it worked!
commuter