You are not logged in.
I have two SATA II drives, the Windows one is larger than the Linux one. I tried running an hdparm test because I just had a feeling things we're a bit sluggish in Linux compared to Windows:
bash-3.2# hdparm --direct -t /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 306 MB in 3.02 seconds = 101.41 MB/sec
bash-3.2# hdparm --direct -t /dev/sdb/dev/sdb:
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 212 MB in 3.00 seconds = 70.56 MB/sec
Anyone have any thoughts on this? Both are in UDMA 6 mode and I haven't done any tweaking with hd/sdparm...
EDIT:
Just realized that the drive with Linux has an 8 MB cache, while Windows has a drive with a 16 MB cache, but would that make this much of a difference?
Last edited by jskier (2009-04-15 02:29:46)
--
JSkier
Offline
Afaik, a larger drive is usually faster because information is condensed in a higher density. Both drives have similar surface areas. Hence, read and access times are generally reduced.
Some general filesystem benchmarks. XFS generally recommended.
http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388
http://linuxgazette.net/122/TWDT.html#piszcz
Also, I've heard some bad press regarding the noatime mount feature. You might wanna disable it.
http://lwn.net/Articles/244829/
http://kerneltrap.org/node/14148
Offline
You're running hdparm under linux on two different drives, what does Windows have to do with anything?
Last edited by apaige (2009-04-15 10:18:43)
Offline
Afaik, a larger drive is usually faster because information is condensed in a higher density. Both drives have similar surface areas. Hence, read and access times are generally reduced.
Some general filesystem benchmarks. XFS generally recommended.
http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388
http://linuxgazette.net/122/TWDT.html#piszczAlso, I've heard some bad press regarding the noatime mount feature. You might wanna disable it.
http://lwn.net/Articles/244829/
http://kerneltrap.org/node/14148
Thank you for your insight. I've got ext3 tweaked, so I probably won't go with XFS. I'll turn off noatime for sure though. With the specs I listed, would it make sense (based on the speed difference between the two drives) to maybe resize my Windows NTFS drive and partition it for Linux? The SDA drive is big enough for both.
Regarding the "Windows and Linux" drives, it was meant to be a differentiating factor.
--
JSkier
Offline