please dont use ted's way of anwsering question, IT PERSONNAL TED THATS WHAT, if you cant stay on a subject go away,
neko --- On Mon, 8/25/08, Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: dd performance question > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: misc@openbsd.org > Date: Monday, August 25, 2008, 11:26 PM > I'm going to ask the obvious question. Why are you > trying to do > whatever it is you're trying to do the hardest way > possible? > > On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Neko > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > having a 250 GB drive on a PATA strip using lowest PIO > mode (without dma if possible), drive specs show a 8 MB > buffer , > > > > 2 cases are : on same pata strip, one on each strip, > > > > important to note that the booted drive is the > if's straight up to my slave. > > (yea i know ill have to run fsck afterwards since itll > think it still mounted) > > and having no user but su himself. > > > > i had ran mine at 4mb block space thinking ill use the > 16mb bus transfer > > divided at most in 4, per second, but i achieved that > in a minute instead. > > this is really poor performance, 3 days for 250gb > transfer at 4mb bs > > > > dd if=/dev/wd0c of=/dev/wd1c bs=4m > > > > so what if i was to use > > > > dd if=/dev/wd0c of=/dev/wd1c bs=4000m > > > > or more, or reflecting number sector divided by lets > say 16... would in > > the end i get the same effect, what are the plateau i > should top of, > > a mb is way too cheezy > > > > i have 512mb of ram, would 512mb be the most ? the > machine is idling either way. > > > > > > neko
