From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 049BC13877A for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:36:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D9653E0A65; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:36:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oa0-f44.google.com (mail-oa0-f44.google.com [209.85.219.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1DC0E0976 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id i7so10531728oag.31 for ; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 05:36:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AgblEis3Wsm8ykBDMpmSnqdiATvfsMcmR5YmovWM0Co=; b=dPzvhIia2KAqpg3KsTlyWj92V1q5KvAPeFXwLVP6BvYM7gAAHgeaBQmFXrdMxRG7Ip 4WhosqggWgX9Ox5Z+da+hTgJDmga8kqXcYudCXeEdhY0WFpBuKiacdPBGBG+EzLftdiK 8wuyadml107X5xGq0GQqgMjHGBam29kePwfS3nyUlZSmpIYxh+i3Ghc+R/baaOpSQM+M EsEkTJryreb7iIwga7TClsTYuag8gFW4nWCNDqunUzl4taST6mY2cJLlKqCYIAEOLV1t 2CwP+8UwBTJrXEwexejRBVYClEpzD1MEcf7zhl0g1TVw+TLaRqP8O0jM58hsTsBrPvz2 pcHg== X-Received: by 10.182.20.169 with SMTP id o9mr49708190obe.59.1404218202178; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 05:36:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-95-206.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.95.206]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id a9sm42858594obh.24.2014.07.01.05.36.41 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Jul 2014 05:36:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53B2AB58.4090401@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 07:36:40 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26.1 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] smartctrl drive error @60% References: <53AA050F.4070907@gmail.com> <3444022.2QCjfBFgDO@andromeda> <53B27DA9.7000301@gmail.com> <10252048.2RCMLJ115Y@andromeda> In-Reply-To: <10252048.2RCMLJ115Y@andromeda> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: e2aa96ed-7908-44e9-93d0-0ebd30fd9809 X-Archives-Hash: e580362fb820a8db91bd276c9a9ca857 J. Roeleveld wrote: > On Tuesday, July 01, 2014 04:21:45 AM Dale wrote: >> >> I watched the dd process when I was erasing the old drive. I got about >> the same results. It started out a little over 200 and went as low as >> 170 or so close to the end. On average, about what hdparm shows. Close >> enough it seems. ;-) > Yep, but do the same after adding a filesystem to the mix? > Eg. mount it somewhere, then dd to a file on that drive. > > -- > Joost > > I've only ever use dd to blank a drive. I never used it to copy anything. While dd may be a bit faster in my use, having a file system is a more realistic use. I think a file system would slow things down a bit, maybe not much since file systems are pretty fast nowadays. Thing is, I'm fairly sure USB won't be as fast as a straight SATA connection. That is one reason I would rather use SATA connections instead. That was also the reason I posted that info. It shows that on my rig here, I can likely copy faster than USB with a SATA connection. The speed I posted is a good bit faster than what Helmut posted even tho his was a general amount. Unless Helmut has a older, slower machine then I wouldn't expect mine to be much if any faster than his. Basically, USB would be a bottleneck that I might can avoid and my mobo supports eSATA connections. . I'm not trying to benchmark, just give a general idea. What hdparm gives me is pretty close to what dd was giving and not to far off from what I get when doing a copy with cp or rsync. I been doing a good bit of copying here lately. I do have a drive that is the older SATA but most are the newer and faster SATA. Dale :-) :-)