On 21.01.2012 15:42, Michael Tokarev wrote: > On 20.01.2012 16:01, Stan Hoeppner wrote: [] >> As it turns out the OP has Seagate LP drives which are not Advanced >> Format 512/4096 drives. No alignment issue there. > > I never had/usd these so don't know. Apparently the LP drives > are more optimized for sequentional operations, since they're > positioned for various media tasks (movies, photos etc) - but > again it is difficult to say what is "optimization" here.
There are 2 modifications of Barracuda LP drives. For 1Gb models, these are LP ST31000520AS (with traditional 512-sized sectors) and LP ST1000DL002, with advanced format (4kb phys sectors). Both has 5.9KRPM rotation speed. FWIW. [] > My mistake about smtp-sink vs smtp-source, indeed you're right > here. What I mean to say here is that - just out of curiocity - > I measured postfix speed on my home machine when I bought one > of these WD greens - because I really was curious whenever all > the speed issues which were mentioned on lots of forums are true. > It was in the beginning of 2010, ie, about a year ago. It was in the beginning of 2011, not 2010. > And having said all that, I think it'd be interesting to > understand why the OP has this slow system. It should not > be this slow, with non-AF drives (misalignment for AF drives > can explain this slowness, and that's the only thing I can > think of right now). Yes there are several layers of storage, > but that should not be _that_ bad. Maybe that's the LP drives, > I dunno. So it very well might be due to misalignment. /mjt
