1 |
On Saturday 20 November 2010 20:46:48 Alan McKinnon wrote: |
2 |
> Apparently, though unproven, at 18:59 on Saturday 20 November 2010, Mick |
3 |
> did |
4 |
> |
5 |
> opine thusly: |
6 |
> > On Saturday 20 November 2010 00:22:49 Alan McKinnon wrote: |
7 |
> > > Apparently, though unproven, at 01:21 on Saturday 20 November 2010, |
8 |
> > > Neil |
9 |
> > > |
10 |
> > > Bothwick did opine thusly: |
11 |
> > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:13:50 +0000, Mick wrote: |
12 |
> > > > > Short of measuring the latency with some system (which I wouldn't |
13 |
> > > > > know how) I have experimented with setting the /boot partition on |
14 |
> > > > > primary and logical partitions and the difference (on a stopwatch) |
15 |
> > > > > was measurable in seconds betweeen having said partition on a |
16 |
> > > > > primary and having it on a logical. |
17 |
> > > > |
18 |
> > > > Are you talking about GRUB loading time, kernel loading or what? |
19 |
> > > > Since /boot isn't normally mounted or used once the kernel is loaded, |
20 |
> > > > I don't see how relevant this is. |
21 |
> > > |
22 |
> > > And: |
23 |
> > > |
24 |
> > > Boot time differences measured in *seconds*? |
25 |
> > > |
26 |
> > > fifty bucks says his fsck number came up |
27 |
> > |
28 |
> > Yes, I'm talking about GRUB loading time. |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> > This is a (touch wood) healthy fs which has been serving my wife happily |
31 |
> > for the last 4 years ... |
32 |
> |
33 |
> Was the speed difference a once-off, or is it consistent and reproducible? |
34 |
|
35 |
It is the latter. Of course this is not important as GRUB is only loaded once |
36 |
and doesn't affect running the OS thereafter. I think that this behaviour is |
37 |
explained by the earlier comment about lookup times and BIOS doing no caching |
38 |
of course. No idea if this would be different on one of the new EFI boot |
39 |
systems. |
40 |
-- |
41 |
Regards, |
42 |
Mick |