From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OL0ol-0002z2-BV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 05 Jun 2010 21:22:11 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 90D2CE07E2; Sat, 5 Jun 2010 21:21:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx.virtyou.com (mx.virtyou.com [94.23.166.77]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688DCE07E2 for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2010 21:21:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from weird.localnet (p4FF04382.dip.t-dialin.net [79.240.67.130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.virtyou.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B91E94A8291 for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:21:00 +0200 (CEST) From: Alex Schuster To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] One hard drive much slower for some reason. Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:20:53 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.33-tuxonice-r2; KDE/4.4.3; i686; ; ) References: <4C0499F1.6050607@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4C0499F1.6050607@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201006052320.54420.wonko@wonkology.org> X-Archives-Salt: d31fb075-64e0-4764-b1ef-4749fa1aa6a1 X-Archives-Hash: 01880ef29ac69ca56a3d61d1588a175b Dale writes: > For the record, hda and hdb are not even mounted. I am currently using > hdc for the OS. The drive used to be a lot faster than this. I used > it for my OS a good while back and recently used it for /var/portage > and /usr/portage. I'm not sure what has changed so I can't figure out > why it is so slow. Anyone see something I am missing? All I see is > the others are udma6 while it is udma5. It has always been that way > tho. > > Thoughts? hdb is in slave mode, maybe this slows things down? If you want to be sure, you could exchange hda and hdb (that is, exchange a jumper so master becomes slave and vice versa, unless you have it set to 'cable select'), and check again. Wonko