Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux? |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
 |
|
12-17-2003, 11:54 PM
|
#1
|
Member
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Nevada
Distribution: fedora, RHEL, ubuntu, suse
Posts: 343
Rep:
|
reiser is way faster than ext3
Wow what a differnece using reiserfs over ext3, reiser is almost 2x faster on my usb 2.0 hard drive. I can't believe it. Take a look at this
/dev/sda1 1 19929 160079661 5 Extended
/dev/sda5 1 9561 76798669+ ext3
/dev/sda6 9562 13640 32764536 fat32
/dev/sda7 13641 19929 50516361 reiserfs
/dev/sda7:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.71 seconds = 23.62 MB/sec
[root@schrock321 schrock]# /sbin/hdparm -t /dev/sda6
/dev/sda6:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.10 seconds = 12.55 MB/sec
[root@schrock321 schrock]#
|
|
|
12-18-2003, 10:54 AM
|
#2
|
Member
Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Distribution: gentoo, Debian Sarge, Slack 9.1
Posts: 206
Rep:
|
Yes, i had read somewhere (micromart if you're from the UK) that it was faster... Didn't realise that much faster though 
|
|
|
12-18-2003, 12:36 PM
|
#3
|
Moderator
Registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 26,546
|
Re: reiser is way faster than ext3
Quote:
Originally posted by illtbagu
/dev/sda1 1 19929 160079661 5 Extended
/dev/sda5 1 9561 76798669+ ext3
/dev/sda6 9562 13640 32764536 fat32
/dev/sda7 13641 19929 50516361 reiserfs
/dev/sda7:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.71 seconds = 23.62 MB/sec
[root@schrock321 schrock]# /sbin/hdparm -t /dev/sda6
/dev/sda6:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.10 seconds = 12.55 MB/sec
[root@schrock321 schrock]#
|
I would hope that reiserfs is faster then a FAT32 partition in linux or is that just a typo and you really meant sda5.
From what I've read: reiserfs is faster with smaller files, jfs is faster with big files. ext3 is just an ext2 with a journal but you can still use all of the ext2 disk utilities if you remount it as ext2.
Last edited by michaelk; 12-18-2003 at 12:40 PM.
|
|
|
12-18-2003, 03:13 PM
|
#4
|
Member
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Nevada
Distribution: fedora, RHEL, ubuntu, suse
Posts: 343
Original Poster
Rep:
|
ext3 and fat32 always run about the same speed for me. This was not a typo just a messup. I meant to test sda5. I will test the ext3 partition when I get home. But I'm confident that the fat32 and ext3 will be the same. I have tested the ext3 partition 2 days ago against the fat32 partition and they were the same. But I will post the actual results just the same.
Does anyone else care to post some comparisons also?
|
|
|
12-18-2003, 03:25 PM
|
#5
|
Member
Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Distribution: gentoo, Debian Sarge, Slack 9.1
Posts: 206
Rep:
|
How did you benchmark the drive?
|
|
|
12-18-2003, 06:30 PM
|
#6
|
Member
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Nevada
Distribution: fedora, RHEL, ubuntu, suse
Posts: 343
Original Poster
Rep:
|
I'm assuming you want to know how I came up with these results? If so then do this at the command prompt, substituting sda6 with what ever your hard drive is
/sbin/hdparm -t /dev/sda6
for details do a
"man hdparm"
at the command prompt
|
|
|
12-20-2003, 11:27 AM
|
#7
|
Member
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Florida
Distribution: Slackware 9.1,10.1
Posts: 268
Rep:
|
You might find this interesting :
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.95 seconds = 32.82 MB/sec
This is with ext3. To be exact, here is fstab entry :
/dev/hda3 / ext3 defaults 1 1
The machine is a 1.7g P4, on an Asus P4b533 board. The disk drive is a Maxtor 7200 rpm, 80g, UDMA100.
What I find most interesting is that this number beats those obtained by your scsi drives. I am reading that correctly, right ?
JC
|
|
|
12-20-2003, 11:44 AM
|
#8
|
Member
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Florida
Distribution: Slackware 9.1,10.1
Posts: 268
Rep:
|
This is also very interesting :
root@jac3:~# hdparm -t /dev/hda2
/dev/hda2:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.29 seconds = 27.95 MB/sec
root@jac3:~# hdparm -t /dev/hda3
/dev/hda3:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.15 seconds = 29.77 MB/sec
root@jac3:~#
This is a much more modest machine ( PII 400mhz ).
But it does have a 7200rpm, 80g, UDMA100 drive. Maybe that is where the performance is coming from.
But these scores are also higher than the ones listed by illtbagu.
illtbagu, are you sure that something isn't mis-configured on your box ? It seems to me that with SCSI devices, you should be able to beat all my scores.
Please post again and list the SCSI controller and disk that you have.
JC
|
|
|
12-20-2003, 12:15 PM
|
#9
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 2,058
Rep:
|
I always use the command
Code:
hdparm -tT /dev/***
put you drive where the *** is.
Code:
[root@smoker windows]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.33 seconds =387.88 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.59 seconds = 24.71 MB/sec
[root@smoker windows]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hdb
/dev/hdb:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.32 seconds =400.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 14.90 seconds = 4.30 MB/sec
[root@smoker windows]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hdd
/dev/hdd:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.32 seconds =400.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 9.85 seconds = 6.50 MB/sec
[root@smoker windows]# hdparm /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
multcount = 16 (on)
IO_support = 0 (default 16-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 8 (on)
geometry = 9729/255/63, sectors = 156301488, start = 0
[root@smoker windows]#
I need to update mine. These drives are capable of a bit more. These settings are pretty conservative. May post back the new ones.
Later

|
|
|
12-20-2003, 12:27 PM
|
#10
|
Member
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Florida
Distribution: Slackware 9.1,10.1
Posts: 268
Rep:
|
Hey, that's cool. When you include 'T' you also test the cache.
Here's my results :
P4 1.7g machine :
root@jac:~# hdparm -tT /dev/hda3
/dev/hda3:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.37 seconds =345.95 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.94 seconds = 32.99 MB/sec
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PII 400m machine :
root@jac3:~# hdparm -tT /dev/hda3
/dev/hda3:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.01 seconds =126.73 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.15 seconds = 29.77 MB/sec
Thanks for the tip.
JC
|
|
|
12-20-2003, 12:36 PM
|
#11
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 2,058
Rep:
|
Yep it is neat. Just have to be careful with those settings. Can really screw one up.
Here's mine after a bit of tweaking:
Code:
[root@smoker windows]# hdparm /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
multcount = 1 (on)
IO_support = 3 (32-bit w/sync)
unmaskirq = 1 (on)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 1 (on)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 8 (on)
geometry = 9729/255/63, sectors = 156301488, start = 0
[root@smoker windows]# hdparm -Tt /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.32 seconds =400.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.36 seconds = 27.12 MB/sec
[root@smoker windows]#
It's a bit better.
Later

|
|
|
12-20-2003, 12:48 PM
|
#12
|
Member
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Florida
Distribution: Slackware 9.1,10.1
Posts: 268
Rep:
|
I usually do this, and it's usually safe :
hdparm -d 1 -c 1 -k 1 /dev/hda
You should see output like this :
/dev/hda:
setting 32-bit IO_support flag to 1
setting using_dma to 1 (on)
setting keep_settings to 1 (on)
IO_support = 1 (32-bit)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 1 (on)
root@jac:/#
Is there an advantage to having 'using_dma = 3' as opposed to 'using_dma=1' ?
Also, what about setting the read ahead on ? How did you do that ?
And last, does the 'keepsettings=1' function mean that you only have to set things one time ?
Currently, I have the entry 'hdparm -d 1 -c 1 -k 1 /dev/hda' in my 'rc.local' file so that it sets it every boot.
|
|
|
12-20-2003, 01:13 PM
|
#13
|
Member
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Qc, Canada
Distribution: CRUX
Posts: 317
Rep:
|
Chipset i845GE
Code:
*-cpu
product: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.40GHz
vendor: Intel Corp.
version: 15.2.7
slot: Socket 478
size: 2736MHz
clock: 152MHz
*-disk:0
description: ATA Disk
product: Maxtor 6Y060L0
bus info: ide@0:master
logical name: /dev/hda
version: YAR41VW0
serial: Y2RACPJE
size: 57GB
capacity: 57GB
capabilities: ata dma lba iordy smart security pm apm
configuration: apm=off mode=udma5 smart=on
*-disk:1
description: ATA Disk
product: MAXTOR 6L040J2
bus info: ide@0:slave
logical name: /dev/hdb
version: AR1.0400
serial: 662133433204
size: 37GB
capacity: 37GB
capabilities: ata dma lba iordy smart security pm
configuration: mode=udma5 smart=on
Code:
>hdparm -Tt /dev/hda /dev/hdb
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 2060 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1028.61 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 144 MB in 3.04 seconds = 47.34 MB/sec
/dev/hdb:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 1964 MB in 2.00 seconds = 981.66 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 120 MB in 3.00 seconds = 39.98 MB/sec
Never had to mess with hdparm to alter the original settings except when I misconfigured my IDE_BLK_DEV in the kernel.
Same for my older P3/Via133a-ATA66, ...which scores in the wherabouts of Dalek's numbers ...iirc, not booted atm.
|
|
|
12-20-2003, 01:29 PM
|
#14
|
Member
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Florida
Distribution: Slackware 9.1,10.1
Posts: 268
Rep:
|
Very interesting UnTamed.
I'm going to test mine without setting the flags and see if there is a difference.
You have very impressive scores. I guess that your disks are just a little bit better quality.
How did you get that output that you posted ?
|
|
|
12-20-2003, 03:07 PM
|
#15
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042
Rep: 
|
hdparm does not benchmark the filesystem. It only benchmarks your hardware. Use bonnie or something similar to find out the real speed for each filesystem.
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:29 PM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|