low breezy hard disk performances

[Øivind Hoel]

The results I get are consistent, and in rescue mode cached reads go
up to around 2300MB in 2secs ~ 1150 MB/s, while buffered stay along
the lines of what I confront in runlevel 5.

Seems I get higher performance than some of you for some reason

On 9/13/05, Øivind Hoel <oivind.hoel at gmail.com> wrote:
> Woops, forgot hdparm settings and info:
> 
> /dev/hda:
>  multcount    =  0 (off)
>  IO_support   =  1 (32-bit)
>  unmaskirq    =  0 (off)
>  using_dma    =  1 (on)
>  keepsettings =  0 (off)
>  readonly     =  0 (off)
>  readahead    = 256 (on)
>  geometry     = 65535/16/63, sectors = 117210240, start = 0
> 
> eruin at ubuntu:~$ sudo hdparm -I /dev/hda
> 
> /dev/hda:
> 
> ATA device, with non-removable media
>         Model Number:       FUJITSU MHV2060AT
>         Serial Number:      NS12T5525MLE
>         Firmware Revision:  00000096
> Standards:
>         Used: ATA/ATAPI-6 T13 1410D revision 3a
>         Supported: 6 5 4 3
> Configuration:
>         Logical         max     current
>         cylinders       16383   16383
>         heads           16      16
>         sectors/track   63      63
>         --
>         CHS current addressable sectors:   16514064
>         LBA    user addressable sectors:  117210240
>         device size with M = 1024*1024:       57231 MBytes
>         device size with M = 1000*1000:       60011 MBytes (60 GB)
> Capabilities:
>         LBA, IORDY(cannot be disabled)
>         Queue depth: 1
>         Standby timer values: spec'd by Standard, no device specific minimum
>         R/W multiple sector transfer: Max = 16  Current = ?
>         Advanced power management level: 128 (0x80)
>         Recommended acoustic management value: 254, current value: 254
>         DMA: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5
>              Cycle time: min=120ns recommended=120ns
>         PIO: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
>              Cycle time: no flow control=240ns  IORDY flow control=120ns
> Commands/features:
>         Enabled Supported:
>            *    READ BUFFER cmd
>            *    WRITE BUFFER cmd
>            *    Host Protected Area feature set
>            *    Look-ahead
>            *    Write cache
>            *    Power Management feature set
>                 Security Mode feature set
>            *    SMART feature set
>            *    Mandatory FLUSH CACHE command
>            *    Device Configuration Overlay feature set
>            *    Automatic Acoustic Management feature set
>                 SET MAX security extension
>                 Power-Up In Standby feature set
>            *    Advanced Power Management feature set
>            *    DOWNLOAD MICROCODE cmd
>            *    SMART self-test
>            *    SMART error logging
> Security:
>         Master password revision code = 65534
>                 supported
>         not     enabled
>         not     locked
>                 frozen
>         not     expired: security count
>         not     supported: enhanced erase
>         60min for SECURITY ERASE UNIT.
> HW reset results:
>         CBLID- above Vih
>         Device num = 0 determined by the jumper
> Checksum: correct
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/13/05, Øivind Hoel <oivind.hoel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Here's my breezy (current) hdparm -tT on a low-end laptop HD:
> >
> > /dev/hda:
> >  Timing cached reads:   1740 MB in  2.00 seconds = 868.40 MB/sec
> >  Timing buffered disk reads:   82 MB in  3.06 seconds =  26.78 MB/sec
> >
> >
> > On 9/13/05, Paul M Edwards <pauledwards at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Curious: are any of you with this issue using SATA or all PATA IDE?
> > >
> > > I have Hoary and Breezy installed, but Hoary is on PATA IDE and Breezy
> > > on the SATA.
> > >
> > > I could get the hdparm info from Hoary, then install Breezy on that
> > > drive and get it's hdparm info if that would help.
> > > --
> > > Paul M Edwards
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/13/05, Alvin Thompson <alvin-ubuntu at thompsonlogic.com> wrote:
> > > > can people who still have hoary installed post their hdparm parameters,
> > > > the results of 'lsmod', and anything else that may be relevant?
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > > alvin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Abel S wrote:
> > > > > I have the same problem. Only I did a warty->Hoary-> breezy... i
> > > > > figured it was that, and I was going to do a fresh install when Breezy
> > > > > was released.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm going to do a freshinstall of Breezy Preview on an older lappy
> > > > > later today, So i can see what happens there
> > > > > -Abel
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9/13/05, The Saltydog <thesaltydog at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>I have completely reinstalled Breezy, started from a Colony CD4, and
> > > > >>my hard disk performances have not been improved! So, it is not a
> > > > >>matter of upgrading from Hoary, nor a matter of some strange module or
> > > > >>service I may have running. It is breezy or kernel 2.6.12. Hard disk
> > > > >>performances are the half of the ones from Hoary, resulting in slowing
> > > > >>down the whole system...
> > >
> > > --
> > > ubuntu-devel mailing list
> > > ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> > > http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
> > >
> >
>