>>> Not sure what the "expected" value should be, but for sheer
>>> comparison value here's the output from a quick benchmark of my
>>> ATA-133 drive.
>>>
>>> /dev/hda:
>>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 1012 MB in 2.00 seconds = 505.32 MB/sec
>>> Timing buffered disk reads: 72 MB in 3.07 seconds = 23.43 MB/sec
>>
> Here's a disk in an active raid5 array (note the slower buffer-cache
> reads):
>
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.40 seconds =322.42 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.21 seconds = 52.76 MB/sec
Hmm, here are my results:
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 1904 MB in 2.00 seconds = 952.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 76 MB in 3.00 seconds = 25.33 MB/sec
The cache read looks ok to me, but should the disk read be better? Ian,
is there anything special about that drive that would make the disk read
so much better than the other two?
Here are my settings:
/dev/hda:
multcount = 16 (on)
IO_support = 1 (32-bit)
unmaskirq = 1 (on)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 8 (on)
geometry = 14596/255/63, sectors = 234493056, start = 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:54:22 EDT