On jan. 18, 21:40, Towncat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On jan. 12, 22:20, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 01/12/08 11:40, Towncat wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I did a > > > > /sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2 > > > Why? Don't you trust brand new disk drives? > > Well, you do have a point... But then, this is the only time I can do > this safely. When there's data on it, it's not that obvious. > > Maybe I was a little paranoid. And of course, I was curious. > > Thank you all. I needed patience:) > > > > > > > > where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for > > > approx 18 hours and is just over three thirds. Is this really supposed > > > to be so slow, > > > Yes. > > > > or is there something wrong? The machine is a Core Duo > > > 1,6, 2GB memory. > > > CPU speed helps, I guess, but always the important factor in disk > > activity is the disk itself. A 10K or 15K RPM FC drive connected to > > a 4GBps HBA will do the bad block scan *much* faster than an IDE or > > SATA drive. > > > -- > > Ron Johnson, Jr. > > Jefferson LA USA > > > "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian > > because I hate vegetables!" > > unknown > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now, it turns out I made a mistake here. I have SATA drives, but because of listing ide_generic in the modules file for initramfs, the drives ran as /dev/hd* instead of /dev/sd*, with the wrong driver. I realised this when I saw how slow RAID 1 resyncing was, too. So actually the process did take unnaturally long (however paranoid and thorough the method was). I hope this will help someone:) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
