1 |
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann |
2 |
<volkerarmin@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
> On Sonntag 07 Februar 2010, Alexander wrote: |
4 |
>> On Sunday 07 February 2010 19:27:46 Mark Knecht wrote: |
5 |
>> > Every time there is an apparent delay I just see the hard drive |
6 |
>> > |
7 |
>> > light turned on solid. That said as far as I know if I wait for things |
8 |
>> > to complete the data is there but I haven't tested it extensively. |
9 |
>> > |
10 |
>> > Is this a bad drive or am I somehow using it incorrectly? |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> Is there any related info in dmesg? |
13 |
> |
14 |
> or maybe there is too much cached and seeking is not the drives strong point |
15 |
> ... |
16 |
|
17 |
It's an interesting question. There is new physical seeking technology |
18 |
in this line of drives which is intended to reduce power and noise, |
19 |
but it seem unlikely to me that WD would purposely make a drive that's |
20 |
10-20x slower than previous generations. Could be though... |
21 |
|
22 |
Are there any user space Linux tools that can test that? |
23 |
|
24 |
The other thing I checked out was that when the block size is not |
25 |
specified it seems that mke2fs uses the default values from |
26 |
/etc/mke2fs.conf and my file says blocksize = 4096 so it would seem to |
27 |
me that if all partitions use blocks then at least the partitions |
28 |
would be properly aligned. |
29 |
|
30 |
My question about that would be when I write a 1 byte file to this |
31 |
drive do I use all 4K of the block it's written in? It's wasteful, but |
32 |
faster, right? I want files to be block-aligned so that the drive |
33 |
isn't doing lots of translation to get the right data. It seems that's |
34 |
been the problem with these drives in the Windows world so WD had to |
35 |
release updated software to get the Windows disk formatters to do |
36 |
things right, or so I think. |
37 |
|
38 |
Thanks Volker. |
39 |
|
40 |
Cheers, |
41 |
Mark |