| 1 |
Alex Schuster wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dale writes: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> For the record, hda and hdb are not even mounted. I am currently using |
| 6 |
>> hdc for the OS. The drive used to be a lot faster than this. I used |
| 7 |
>> it for my OS a good while back and recently used it for /var/portage |
| 8 |
>> and /usr/portage. I'm not sure what has changed so I can't figure out |
| 9 |
>> why it is so slow. Anyone see something I am missing? All I see is |
| 10 |
>> the others are udma6 while it is udma5. It has always been that way |
| 11 |
>> tho. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> Thoughts? |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
> hdb is in slave mode, maybe this slows things down? If you want to be |
| 16 |
> sure, you could exchange hda and hdb (that is, exchange a jumper so master |
| 17 |
> becomes slave and vice versa, unless you have it set to 'cable select'), |
| 18 |
> and check again. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Wonko |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It hasn't mattered in the past. I'm not sure why it should matter now. |
| 25 |
I really don't see how it could matter at all really. Heck, my DVD |
| 26 |
drive is slow as it gets, its udma4, but hdc is on the same cable and it |
| 27 |
is one of the faster drives I have. That would exclude sda of course. |
| 28 |
Those two drives has been in there this way for ages and used to be |
| 29 |
pretty close as far as speed. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I'm thinking age is catching up on the drive myself. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Dale |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
:-) :-) |
Archives