Search Results

Search found 85 results on 4 pages for 'hdparm'.

Page 3/4 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4  | Next Page >

• TRIM in centos 5.X?

  - by Frank Farmer

  I've got a bunch of centos 5 boxes with Intel X-25 drives (x25-m in dev, x25-e in prod, I think). We're seeing severely degraded disk performance on one of our dev boxes (which easily does 5+ gb of writes every day, meaning we write the full drive's worth of data several times a month). The box in question: Intel x25-m Ext3 (which doesn't support TRIM) centos 5 vmware ESXi Wikipedia mentions that newer versions of hdparm (which centos5 doesn't include) can bulk-TRIM free blocks. This utility also sounds potentially useful: http://blog.patshead.com/2009/12/a-quick-and-dirty-wipersh-fix-for-intel-x25-m.html Disk write performance has dropped to <1 MB/sec while copying a 300 meg directory on this system, as of a month or so ago -- it used to be able to perform the same copy operation at least 5 times faster. What can I do to recover performance on this system?

  Read the article

• serving static assets via http is really slow compared to sshfs (apache2/nginx)

  - by s1lv3r

  After migrating to a new VPS I had some users complaining about slow loading images on their sites. After creating some test files with dd I realized that I can download all files via sshfs with full speed while downloads via web are painfully slow. The larger the file is and the longer the transfer takes, the slower the transfer speed gets. I thought I had some problems with Apache and just spend the whole evening with replacing Apache2 against nginx for static file serving - with no effect at all. No I/O wait states in top. Tons of RAM free, no high CPU utilization and hdparm shows a decent I/O performance at all times. I just have no idea anymore, what's happening on this server. This is a link to a demo file: http://master.dealux.de/file.tgz Anybody an idea what I can check out?

  Read the article

• Very slow disk performance on Dell PowerEdge 2950 w/ PERC 6/i running RAID 10

  - by vocoder

  I recently set up a server running Ubuntu 10.04 LTS on a Dell PowerEdge 2950 server - it has 6 500 gb 7200RPM SATA drives setup in a RAID 10 config. I am seeing extremely poor disk performance - the RAID array reports all disks are normal and using MegaCLI, it looks like the BBU is fine. hdparm -tT /dev/sda reports: Timing cached reads: 90 MB in 2.05 seconds = 43.96 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 24 MB in 3.11 seconds = 7.72 MB/sec So as you can see, it takes forever to something as simple as an apt-get upgrade and even logging into the server. How do I go about troubleshooting what is causing this? I upgraded the firmware on the PERC 6i RAID controller to the latest, but didn't see any improvements.

  Read the article

• Linux WD30EZRX WD Green HDD & Blacx Duet 5G Usb

  - by Adam

  I have connected up an WD30EZRX WD Green HDD to a Thermaltake Blacx Duet 5G USB dock in Ubuntu 12.04. Every thing seems fine except when the HDD idles it seems to have error ls: reading directory .: Input/output error after a while and is only fixed by unmounting and remounting the drive as root. I have the following line in /etc/fstab UUID=AAF670E9F670B6E3 /media/3TB ntfs defaults,user,auto 0 0 I have noticed that it seems to go between /dev/sdc2 and /dev/sdd2 devices on remount. I did copy 1TB last night without issue in 1 sitting. But after x mins of idle it has remount issue. Any tips/suggestions on how to proceed would be appreciated. Spent most of the night googling and all its done is made me sad. Edit (tried as suggested): root@mediaserver:/media/3TB# sudo hdparm -B 255 -S 253 /dev/sdd2 /dev/sdd2: setting Advanced Power Management level to disabled HDIO_DRIVE_CMD failed: Input/output error setting standby to 253 (vendor-specific) APM_level = not supported Seems as if that didn't help with this particular drive.

  Read the article

• Finding the file that is on a bad block on a HFS+ volume (debugfs for HFS+)

  - by Blair Zajac

  I have a drive in our iMac that has bad blocks, as booting from an Ubuntu 11.10 live CD and using ddrescue -f /dev/sda /dev/null finds them. I'd like to get the drive to remap them by writing to the blocks, say using hdparm --write-sector, but I don't want to do this without knowing what's in those blocks and finding the file that owns them, so I can restore the file from another source. I found fileXray but don't feel like spending $79 to map a block to a file and hfsdebug has been taken offline. Are there suggestions on a tool or technique to use? I looked at all the Ubuntu HFS+ packages to see if they could provide this info but nothing jumped out at me. BTW, I used Disk Utility to erase the empty space, but it didn't get any of the bad blocks to be remapped, according to smartctl -A.

  Read the article

• Disable disk caches in AWS EBS for PostgreSQL?

  - by Alexandr Kurilin

  It's my understanding that, without correctly disabling OS-level and drive-level caching, there is a chance that in case of system failure the Write-Ahead Log might not be saved correctly and in fact might get corrupted, possibly preventing data recovery. I've already made sure that wal_sync_method=fdatasync however I was unable to make any configuration changes with hdparm since I get the following: $ sudo htparm -I /dev/xvdf /dev/xvdf: HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(identify) failed: Invalid argument Looks like that option is not available in the kind of setup you get in EC2. Am I missing anything here? Are there any other obvious caches I have to disable to ensure the WAL's safety?

  Read the article

• SAS disk performance drops a while after reboot.

  - by Flamewires

  So we have some workstations with identical hardware. The Fedora14 box has a couple weeks uptime and still get good performance. hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 21766 MB in 2.00 seconds = 10902.12 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 586 MB in 3.00 seconds = 195.20 MB/sec The Cent 5.5 boxes however seem to be okay after a reboot, /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 34636 MB in 2.00 seconds = 17354.64 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 498 MB in 3.01 seconds = 165.62 MB/sec but some time later( unsure exactly, tested at approx 1 day uptime) /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 2132 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1064.96 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 160 MB in 3.01 seconds = 53.16 MB/sec drop to this. This is with very low load. I believe they all have the same bios settings. Any ideas what could cause this on Cent? Ask for more info. It might also be worth noting, that passing the --direct flag causes the slow boxes to perform similarly to the non-slow ones for buffered disk reads.

  Read the article

• e2fsck extremly slow, although enough memory exists

  - by kaefert

  I've got this external USB-Disk: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ lsusb -s 2:3 Bus 002 Device 003: ID 0bc2:3320 Seagate RSS LLC As can be seen in this dmesg output, there are some problems that prevents that disk from beeing mounted: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ dmesg | grep sdb [ 114.474342] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.475089] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off [ 114.475092] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 43 00 00 00 [ 114.475959] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA [ 114.477093] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.501649] sdb: sdb1 [ 114.502717] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.504354] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk [ 116.804408] EXT4-fs (sdb1): ext4_check_descriptors: Checksum for group 3976 failed (47397!=61519) [ 116.804413] EXT4-fs (sdb1): group descriptors corrupted! So I went and fired up my favorite partition manager - gparted, and told it to verify and repair the partition sdb1. This made gparted call e2fsck (version 1.42.4 (12-Jun-2012)) e2fsck -f -y -v /dev/sdb1 Although gparted called e2fsck with the "-v" option, sadly it doesn't show me the output of my e2fsck process (bugreport https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=467925 ) I started this whole thing on Sunday (2012-11-04_2200) evening, so about 48 hours ago, this is what htop says about it now (2012-11-06-1900): PID USER PRI NI VIRT RES SHR S CPU% MEM% TIME+ Command 3704 root 39 19 1560M 1166M 768 R 98.0 19.5 42h56:43 e2fsck -f -y -v /dev/sdb1 Now I found a few posts on the internet that discuss e2fsck running slow, for example: http://gparted-forum.surf4.info/viewtopic.php?id=13613 where they write that its a good idea to see if the disk is just that slow because maybe its damaged, and I think these outputs tell me that this is not the case in my case: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 3562 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1783.29 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 82 MB in 3.01 seconds = 27.26 MB/sec kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo hdparm /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: multcount = 0 (off) readonly = 0 (off) readahead = 256 (on) geometry = 364801/255/63, sectors = 5860533160, start = 0 However, although I can read quickly from that disk, this disk speed doesn't seem to be used by e2fsck, considering tools like gkrellm or iotop or this: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ iostat -x Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (blechmobil) 2012-11-06 _x86_64_ (2 CPU) avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 14,24 47,81 14,63 0,95 0,00 22,37 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await r_await w_await svctm %util sda 0,59 8,29 2,42 5,14 43,17 160,17 53,75 0,30 39,80 8,72 54,42 3,95 2,99 sdb 137,54 5,48 9,23 0,20 587,07 22,73 129,35 0,07 7,70 7,51 16,18 2,17 2,04 Now I researched a little bit on how to find out what e2fsck is doing with all that processor time, and I found the tool strace, which gives me this: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo strace -p3704 lseek(4, 41026998272, SEEK_SET) = 41026998272 write(4, "\212\354K[_\361\3nl\212\245\352\255jR\303\354\312Yv\334p\253r\217\265\3567\325\257\3766"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404766720, SEEK_SET) = 48404766720 read(4, "\7t\260\366\346\337\304\210\33\267j\35\377'\31f\372\252\ffU\317.y\211\360\36\240c\30`\34"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 41027002368, SEEK_SET) = 41027002368 write(4, "\232]7Ws\321\352\t\1@[+5\263\334\276{\343zZx\352\21\316`1\271[\202\350R`"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404770816, SEEK_SET) = 48404770816 read(4, "\17\362r\230\327\25\346//\210H\v\311\3237\323K\304\306\361a\223\311\324\272?\213\tq \370\24"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 41027006464, SEEK_SET) = 41027006464 write(4, "\367yy>x\216?=\324Z\305\351\376&\25\244\210\271\22\306}\276\237\370(\214\205G\262\360\257#"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404774912, SEEK_SET) = 48404774912 read(4, "\365\25\0\21|T\0\21}3t_\272\373\222k\r\177\303\1\201\261\221$\261B\232\3142\21U\316"..., 4096) = 4096 ^CProcess 3704 detached around 16 of these lines every second, so 4 read and 4 write operations every second, which I don't consider to be a lot.. And finally, my question: Will this process ever finish? If those numbers from fseek (48404774912) represent bytes, that would be something like 45 gigabytes, with this beeing a 3 terrabyte disk, which would give me 134 days to go, if the speed stays constant, and he scans the disk like this completly and only once. Do you have some advice for me? I have most of the data on that disk elsewhere, but I've put a lot of hours into sorting and merging it to this disk, so I would prefer to getting this disk up and running again, without formatting it anew. I don't think that the hardware is damaged since the disk is only a few months and since I can't see any I/O errors in the dmesg output. UPDATE: I just looked at the strace output again (2012-11-06_2300), now it looks like this: lseek(4, 1419860611072, SEEK_SET) = 1419860611072 read(4, "3#\f\2447\335\0\22A\355\374\276j\204'\207|\217V|\23\245[\7VP\251\242\276\207\317:"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018145792, SEEK_SET) = 43018145792 write(4, "]\206\231\342Y\204-2I\362\242\344\6R\205\361\324\177\265\317C\334V\324\260\334\275t=\10F."..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 1419860615168, SEEK_SET) = 1419860615168 read(4, "\262\305\314Y\367\37x\326\245\226\226\320N\333$s\34\204\311\222\7\315\236\336\300TK\337\264\236\211n"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018149888, SEEK_SET) = 43018149888 write(4, "\271\224m\311\224\25!I\376\16;\377\0\223H\25Yd\201Y\342\r\203\271\24eG<\202{\373V"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 1419860619264, SEEK_SET) = 1419860619264 read(4, ";d\360\177\n\346\253\210\222|\250\352T\335M\33\260\320\261\7g\222P\344H?t\240\20\2548\310"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018153984, SEEK_SET) = 43018153984 write(4, "\360\252j\317\310\251G\227\335{\214`\341\267\31Y\202\360\v\374\307oq\3063\217Z\223\313\36D\211"..., 4096) = 4096 So this number of the lseeks before the reads, like 1419860619264 are already a lot bigger, standing for 1.29 terabytes if the numbers are bytes, so it doesn't seem to be a linear progress on a big scale, maybe there are only some areas that need work, that have big gaps in between them. (times are in CET)

  Read the article

• When HDD wakes up?

  - by NumberFour

  Im looking for some small script or application which could log the time when a non-system disk wakes up. I cannot identify which application or script wakes up my non-system drive (which has to be asleep until I work with it). I have already set the noatime flag, tried to use powertop and iotop to determine which application could prevent it from going to sleep - but with no result. So my plan is to set this drive asleep (hdparm -Y) and see at what time it gets regularly woken up. Thanks for any advice.

  Read the article

• What is the best way to shutdown hard disk?

  - by Sunil

  Right Now I'm using hdparm command in unix to shut down the hard disk but there are few issues with it. when it wakes back up it consumes lots power. Is there any other way to do it? Many times when I put my hard disk to sleep, I can see few bursts at the beginning and then after a while it goes to sleep. I think its because of the journaling system in ubuntu (which I use) Have anybody encountered that? What would be the best linux/unix operating system (eg: ubuntu/centos/redhat) to work on extensive hard disk operations? I would highly appreciate if you could share the problems you encountered while doing this operation.

  Read the article

• Hardware settings reviewing

  - by dino99

  Get some hardware related errors logged into dmesg: oem@dub:~$ dmesg | grep ata10 [ 1.007989] ata10: PATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xa800 ctl 0xa480 bmdma 0xa408 irq 18 [ 1.691664] ata10: prereset failed (errno=-19) [ 1.691670] ata10: reset failed, giving up oem@dub:~$ dmesg | grep ata2 [ 0.990290] ata2: SATA max UDMA/133 abar m1024@0xfebfb800 port 0xfebfb980 irq 45 [ 1.688011] ata2: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [ 1.688055] ata2.00: unsupported device, disabling [ 1.688057] ata2.00: disabled As I understand, its related to my old Seagate SATA HDD, and the PATA CDROM. These errors are quite new, so I feel that their settings (dma, write-cache, ...) have been modified by some upgrades. I've already used hdparm to set write-cache off on the HDDs. But it seems like I need to review some other setting(s) too. With oldest distro it was easy to know about the hardware settings, but now on Quantal/Precise its deeply hidden for the average user. So i would like to know how to view/modify these settings. About the CDROM reader, the problem is different: - the system don't identify it with an UUID; but only with ATAPI or by-id oem@dub:~$ dmesg|grep 'ATAPI' [ 1.308611] ata3.00: ATAPI: TSSTcorp CDDVDW SH-S203D, SB00, max UDMA/100 oem@dub:~$ ls -l /dev/disk/by-id/ ...... lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 oct. 1 06:42 ata-TSSTcorp_CDDVDW_SH-S203D -> ../../sr0 .....

  Read the article

• Very slow write access to SSD disks on some Asus P8Z77 motherboards

  - by lenik

  I have Asus P8Z77-V LK motherboard, that ran Mint 13 (based on Ubuntu 12.04) just perfectly, but recently I've tried to install Mint 17 and noticed abysmal write performance. Write speed on SSD disk was about 1.5MB/sec, when it's supposed to be in 150-250MB/sec range. For write testing I've used dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=10M count=10 while booted up from LiveCD. I have also tested the read speed with hdparm -tT /dev/sda and got about 440MB/sec -- that's normal. I can tell, the read performance has not degraded at all and is not an issue here. Since I had a few different SSD disks and few motherboards, I've tested and tested and here are results: Asus P8H77 works fine with Mint13, has very slow write speed starting from Mint14. Asus P8Z77-V LK works with Mint13, has very slow write speed starting from Mint14. Asus P8Z77-V PRO works with Mint13, and works just fine with Mint14, 15, 16 and 17. The only difference between "PRO" version and others is that it has extra SATA controller onboard (in addition to the Z77 chipset SATA controller) providing extra 2 SATA ports. SSD disks work fine with "PRO" version when connected to the native SATA ports as well as to the ports provided by extra SATA controller, so this does not look like a hardware issue. As far as I can tell, there's something changed in the kernel while going from 3.2 to 3.5, that affects the detection of onboard SATA controller for Asus P8*77 motherboards, that screws up the write speed for SSD drives. Could anyone shed some light on how to fix this issue or, possibly, give a pointer to a more suitable place to ask this question?

  Read the article

• Automatic TRIM vs. manual TRIM

  - by Eike Cochu

  I am currently trying to find out how to trim with my new TP and was wondering about the difference of manual/online trimming. Here is my setup: ThinkPad T430s with SSD Samsung 830, 128GB and Xubuntu 12.10, here are some outputs to check if trim will work on my system (got these from here: http://wiki.ubuntuusers.de/SSD/TRIM) root@eike-tp:~# sudo hdparm -I /dev/sda | grep -i TRIM * Data Set Management TRIM supported (limit 8 blocks) First, I tried the online trimming: How to enable TRIM? my fstab with discard inserted: UUID=d6c49c17-a4f1-466c-9f7e-896c20db3bba / ext4 discard,noatime,errors=remount-ro 0 1 # swap was on /dev/sda5 during installation UUID=a0322f5f-c6c1-4896-863f-668f0638d8cf none swap sw 0 0 tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=1777 0 0 I tried to test if it works (but I don't get any zeroes when I try it with /dev/sda), but found out that this method is only possible with SSD type 2 and I seem to have type 3. So I don't know if it works or not. The Ubuntuwiki (first link) recommends manual trimming, so I set up a daily cronjob instead of discard: #!/bin/sh LOG=/var/log/batched_discard.log echo "*** $(date -R) ***" >> $LOG fstrim -v / >> $LOG the wiki article suggests weekly or daily. Now to my questions: How often executes the automated trim? How often is recommended? Online vs. manual trimming? Thank you for your help

  Read the article

• UPDATE MANAGER UNABLE TO UPDATE

  - by muguro

  Requires installation of untrusted packages The action would require the installation of packages from not authenticated sources. i get this error every time i try updating. the system shows that it has 466 updates but fails after clicking update more details have this accountsservice apparmor apport apport-gtk apt apt-transport-https apt-utils aptdaemon aptdaemon-data at-spi2-core bamfdaemon base-files bcmwl-kernel-source bind9-host compiz compiz-core compiz-gnome compiz-plugins-default cron cups cups-bsd cups-client cups-common cups-filters cups-ppdc dbus dbus-x11 dconf-gsettings-backend dconf-service desktop-file-utils dmsetup dnsutils empathy empathy-common eog evince evince-common evolution-data-server evolution-data-server-common firefox firefox-globalmenu firefox-gnome-support firefox-locale-en fontconfig fontconfig-config fonts-liberation fonts-opensymbol foomatic-filters gcalctool gdb ghostscript ghostscript-cups ghostscript-x ginn gir1.2-atspi-2.0 gir1.2-dbusmenu-glib-0.4 gir1.2-dbusmenu-gtk-0.4 gir1.2-gst-plugins-base-0.10 gir1.2-gtk-3.0 gir1.2-gtksource-3.0 gir1.2-gudev-1.0 gir1.2-javascriptcoregtk-3.0 gir1.2-launchpad-integration-3.0 gir1.2-pango-1.0 gir1.2-rb-3.0 gir1.2-totem-1.0 gir1.2-ubuntuoneui-3.0 gir1.2-unity-5.0 gir1.2-webkit-3.0 glib-networking glib-networking-common glib-networking-services gnome-accessibility-themes gnome-control-center gnome-control-center-data gnome-desktop3-data gnome-games-data gnome-icon-theme gnome-media gnome-orca gnome-settings-daemon gnome-sudoku gnomine gnupg google-talkplugin gpgv grub-common grub-pc grub-pc-bin grub2-common gstreamer0.10-alsa gstreamer0.10-plugins-base gstreamer0.10-plugins-base-apps gstreamer0.10-x gvfs gvfs-backends gvfs-bin gvfs-common gvfs-daemons gvfs-fuse gvfs-libs gwibber gwibber-service gwibber-service-facebook gwibber-service-identica gwibber-service-twitter hdparm hplip hplip-data indicator-sound initscripts isc-dhcp-client isc-dhcp-common jockey-common jockey-gtk krb5-locales landscape-client-ui-install language-pack-en language-pack-en-base language-pack-gnome-en language-pack-gnome-en-base launchpad-integration libaccountsservice0 libapt-inst1.4 libapt-pkg4.12 libart-2.0-2 libasound2 libatspi2.0-0 libbamf0 libbamf3-0 libbind9-80 libc-bin libc-dev-bin libc6 libc6-dev libcairo-gobject2 libcairo2

  Read the article

• Is a disk/ata timeout exception dangerous?

  - by j-g-faustus

  I have a few hard drives in mdadm RAID 5 configured to go to standby after a few minutes of inactivity. (Using hdparm.conf spindown_time.) At irregular intervals I get messages like these in dmesg: [ 1840.251661] ata4.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [ 1840.251722] ata4.00: failed command: SMART [ 1840.251758] ata4.00: cmd b0/d5:01:06:4f:c2/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [ 1840.251759] res 40/00:14:50:2e:04/00:00:02:00:00/40 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [ 1840.251858] ata4.00: status: { DRDY } [ 1840.251888] ata4: hard resetting link [ 1840.600742] ata4: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [ 1840.601521] ata4.00: configured for UDMA/133 [ 1840.601547] ata4: EH complete [337877.713988] ata4.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [337877.714019] ata4.00: failed command: SMART [337877.714038] ata4.00: cmd b0/d5:01:06:4f:c2/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [337877.714039] res 40/00:04:90:10:81/00:00:00:00:00/40 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [337877.714089] ata4.00: status: { DRDY } [337877.714107] ata4: hard resetting link [337878.063085] ata4: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [337878.063743] ata4.00: configured for UDMA/133 [337878.063764] ata4: EH complete I think the exception is caused by smartd when a drive does not wake up quickly enough. There are no issues (that I can tell) in accessing the drives normally through the file system - it takes a few seconds longer than normal when they are asleep, but there are no exceptions. Is this something I should worry about, as a potential symptom on something that could corrupt a drive over time? Or can I safely ignore it as part of normal operation? Edit: By request: smartctl -a for sdaand sde, both disks are members of the array. If ata4is the same as scsi-4 then sde is the one that gave the error above, according to /dev/disk/by-path.

  Read the article

• Unsure about TRIM enabled on my SSD

  - by user84750

  I have a SSD OCZ Vertex4 installed on my laptop. I'm running Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. I have enable TRIM by adding "discard" to my fstab file. (also added option noatime). I rebooted my Ubuntu and followed These instructions here to test TRIM. The end results of my tempfile was all ffff's, when it should have read all zero's, which is telling me TRIM is not really working or enabled correctly. Did I miss something? Also, will it be a problem if only my /home directory is encrypted. AND if you ask why I have swap on my SSD, it's because I let Ubuntu set up my partition. When I have my SSD, I just wanted to install Ubuntu as fast as possible. =) I've done testing to see at which point it will start to use swap and it took a lot of applications open to finally use swap. I currently have 4 GB of memory. I might shrink this to like 512 MB or 1 GB the most. Here's some info about my file system setup. sudo hdparm -I /dev/sda1 | grep "TRIM supported" Data Set Management TRIM supported (limit 16 blocks) sudo fdisk -l /dev/sda Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 242016255 121007104 83 Linux /dev/sda2 242018302 250068991 4025345 5 Extended /dev/sda5 242018304 250068991 4025344 82 Linux swap / Solaris ls /dev/mapper control cryptswap1

  Read the article

• Is SSD TRIM support still automatic in 12.10?

  - by dam

  Folks I had automatic TRIM working on my laptop running Ubuntu Precise. As in the TRIM guide I added discard to mount options in /etc/fstab, and hdparm --read-sector read 0s immediately after a rm && sync. Using the very same hardware, laptop and SSD, TRIM seems no longer to be automatic after upgrading to Quantal. I recognise the test in the guide I mentioned above may not necessarily work. SSD erase blocks and all that. But Quantal is at least different. After deleting the file and syncing, its data are still on disk and unerased even after waiting several minutes. fstrim will then 0 the dead file's blocks. Once. Repeat the same test five minutes later, and fstrim does nothing. I figure this is probably really a kernel issue, but that box is too black for my spelunking torch. I'm prepared to believe that kernel 3.5 knows what I want better than I do, and all is well despite appearances, but it looks for all the world like TRIM isn't quite all there any more. Anybody have the scoop on TRIM in Quantal/kernel 3.5?

  Read the article

• e2fsck extremely slow, although enough memory exists

  - by kaefert

  I've got this external USB-Disk: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ lsusb -s 2:3 Bus 002 Device 003: ID 0bc2:3320 Seagate RSS LLC As can be seen in this dmesg output, there is some problem that prevents that disk from beeing mounted: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ dmesg ... [ 113.084079] usb 2-1: new high-speed USB device number 3 using ehci_hcd [ 113.217783] usb 2-1: New USB device found, idVendor=0bc2, idProduct=3320 [ 113.217787] usb 2-1: New USB device strings: Mfr=2, Product=3, SerialNumber=1 [ 113.217790] usb 2-1: Product: Expansion Desk [ 113.217792] usb 2-1: Manufacturer: Seagate [ 113.217794] usb 2-1: SerialNumber: NA4J4N6K [ 113.435404] usbcore: registered new interface driver uas [ 113.455315] Initializing USB Mass Storage driver... [ 113.468051] scsi5 : usb-storage 2-1:1.0 [ 113.468180] usbcore: registered new interface driver usb-storage [ 113.468182] USB Mass Storage support registered. [ 114.473105] scsi 5:0:0:0: Direct-Access Seagate Expansion Desk 070B PQ: 0 ANSI: 6 [ 114.474342] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.475089] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off [ 114.475092] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 43 00 00 00 [ 114.475959] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA [ 114.477093] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.501649] sdb: sdb1 [ 114.502717] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.504354] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk [ 116.804408] EXT4-fs (sdb1): ext4_check_descriptors: Checksum for group 3976 failed (47397!=61519) [ 116.804413] EXT4-fs (sdb1): group descriptors corrupted! ... So I went and fired up my favorite partition manager - gparted, and told it to verify and repair the partition sdb1. This made gparted call e2fsck (version 1.42.4 (12-Jun-2012)) e2fsck -f -y -v /dev/sdb1 Although gparted called e2fsck with the "-v" option, sadly it doesn't show me the output of my e2fsck process (bugreport https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=467925 ) I started this whole thing on Sunday (2012-11-04_2200) evening, so about 48 hours ago, this is what htop says about it now (2012-11-06-1900): PID USER PRI NI VIRT RES SHR S CPU% MEM% TIME+ Command 3704 root 39 19 1560M 1166M 768 R 98.0 19.5 42h56:43 e2fsck -f -y -v /dev/sdb1 Now I found a few posts on the internet that discuss e2fsck running slow, for example: http://gparted-forum.surf4.info/viewtopic.php?id=13613 where they write that its a good idea to see if the disk is just that slow because maybe its damaged, and I think these outputs tell me that this is not the case in my case: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 3562 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1783.29 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 82 MB in 3.01 seconds = 27.26 MB/sec kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo hdparm /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: multcount = 0 (off) readonly = 0 (off) readahead = 256 (on) geometry = 364801/255/63, sectors = 5860533160, start = 0 However, although I can read quickly from that disk, this disk speed doesn't seem to be used by e2fsck, considering tools like gkrellm or iotop or this: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ iostat -x Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (blechmobil) 2012-11-06 _x86_64_ (2 CPU) avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 14,24 47,81 14,63 0,95 0,00 22,37 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await r_await w_await svctm %util sda 0,59 8,29 2,42 5,14 43,17 160,17 53,75 0,30 39,80 8,72 54,42 3,95 2,99 sdb 137,54 5,48 9,23 0,20 587,07 22,73 129,35 0,07 7,70 7,51 16,18 2,17 2,04 Now I researched a little bit on how to find out what e2fsck is doing with all that processor time, and I found the tool strace, which gives me this: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo strace -p3704 lseek(4, 41026998272, SEEK_SET) = 41026998272 write(4, "\212\354K[_\361\3nl\212\245\352\255jR\303\354\312Yv\334p\253r\217\265\3567\325\257\3766"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404766720, SEEK_SET) = 48404766720 read(4, "\7t\260\366\346\337\304\210\33\267j\35\377'\31f\372\252\ffU\317.y\211\360\36\240c\30`\34"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 41027002368, SEEK_SET) = 41027002368 write(4, "\232]7Ws\321\352\t\1@[+5\263\334\276{\343zZx\352\21\316`1\271[\202\350R`"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404770816, SEEK_SET) = 48404770816 read(4, "\17\362r\230\327\25\346//\210H\v\311\3237\323K\304\306\361a\223\311\324\272?\213\tq \370\24"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 41027006464, SEEK_SET) = 41027006464 write(4, "\367yy>x\216?=\324Z\305\351\376&\25\244\210\271\22\306}\276\237\370(\214\205G\262\360\257#"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404774912, SEEK_SET) = 48404774912 read(4, "\365\25\0\21|T\0\21}3t_\272\373\222k\r\177\303\1\201\261\221$\261B\232\3142\21U\316"..., 4096) = 4096 ^CProcess 3704 detached around 16 of these lines every second, so 4 read and 4 write operations every second, which I don't consider to be a lot.. And finally, my question: Will this process ever finish? If those numbers from fseek (48404774912) represent bytes, that would be something like 45 gigabytes, with this beeing a 3 terrabyte disk, which would give me 134 days to go, if the speed stays constant, and e2fsck scans the disk like this completly and only once. Do you have some advice for me? I have most of the data on that disk elsewhere, but I've put a lot of hours into sorting and merging it to this disk, so I would prefer to getting this disk up and running again, without formatting it anew. I don't think that the hardware is damaged since the disk is only a few months and since I can't see any I/O errors in the dmesg output. UPDATE: I just looked at the strace output again (2012-11-06_2300), now it looks like this: lseek(4, 1419860611072, SEEK_SET) = 1419860611072 read(4, "3#\f\2447\335\0\22A\355\374\276j\204'\207|\217V|\23\245[\7VP\251\242\276\207\317:"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018145792, SEEK_SET) = 43018145792 write(4, "]\206\231\342Y\204-2I\362\242\344\6R\205\361\324\177\265\317C\334V\324\260\334\275t=\10F."..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 1419860615168, SEEK_SET) = 1419860615168 read(4, "\262\305\314Y\367\37x\326\245\226\226\320N\333$s\34\204\311\222\7\315\236\336\300TK\337\264\236\211n"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018149888, SEEK_SET) = 43018149888 write(4, "\271\224m\311\224\25!I\376\16;\377\0\223H\25Yd\201Y\342\r\203\271\24eG<\202{\373V"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 1419860619264, SEEK_SET) = 1419860619264 read(4, ";d\360\177\n\346\253\210\222|\250\352T\335M\33\260\320\261\7g\222P\344H?t\240\20\2548\310"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018153984, SEEK_SET) = 43018153984 write(4, "\360\252j\317\310\251G\227\335{\214`\341\267\31Y\202\360\v\374\307oq\3063\217Z\223\313\36D\211"..., 4096) = 4096 So the numbers in the lseek lines before the reads, like 1419860619264 are already a lot bigger, standing for 1.29 terabytes if those numbers are bytes, so it doesn't seem to be a linear progress on a big scale, maybe there are only some areas that need work, that have big gaps in between them. UPDATE2: Okey, big disappointment, the numbers are back to very small again (2012-11-07_0720) lseek(4, 52174548992, SEEK_SET) = 52174548992 read(4, "\374\312\22\\\325\215\213\23\0357U\222\246\370v^f(\312|f\212\362\343\375\373\342\4\204mU6"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 46603526144, SEEK_SET) = 46603526144 write(4, "\370\261\223\227\23?\4\4\217\264\320_Am\246CQ\313^\203U\253\274\204\277\2564n\227\177\267\343"..., 4096) = 4096 so either e2fsck goes over the data multiple times, or it just hops back and forth multiple times. Or my assumption that those numbers are bytes is wrong. UPDATE3: Since it's mentioned here http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=282125&page=2 that you can testisk while e2fsck is running, i tried that, though not with a lot of success. When asking testdisk to display the data of my partition, this is what I get: TestDisk 6.13, Data Recovery Utility, November 2011 Christophe GRENIER <[email protected]> http://www.cgsecurity.org 1 P Linux 0 4 5 45600 40 8 732566272 Can't open filesystem. Filesystem seems damaged. And this is what strace currently gives me (2012-11-07_1030) lseek(4, 212460343296, SEEK_SET) = 212460343296 read(4, "\315Mb\265v\377Gn \24\f\205EHh\2349~\330\273\203\3375\206\10\r3=W\210\372\352"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 47347830784, SEEK_SET) = 47347830784 write(4, "]\204\223\300I\357\4\26\33+\243\312G\230\250\371*m2U\t_\215\265J \252\342Pm\360D"..., 4096) = 4096 (times are in CET)

  Read the article

• An increase to 3 Gig of RAM slows down Ubuntu 10.04 LTS

  - by williepabon

  I have Ubuntu 10.04 running from an external hard drive (installed on an enclosure) connected via USB port. Like a month or so ago, I increased RAM on my pc from 2 Gigs to 3 Gigs. This resulted on extremely long boot times and slow application loads. While I was understanding the nature of my problem, I posted various threads on this forum ( Questions # 188417, 188801), where I was advised to gather speed tests, and other info on my machine. I was also suggested that I might have problems with the RAM installed. Initially, I did not consider that possibility because: 1) I did a memory test with a diagnostic program from DELL (My pc is from Dell) 2) My pc works fine with Windows XP (the default OS), no problems with memory 3) My pc works fine when booting with Ubuntu 10.10 memory stick, no speed problems 4) My pc works fine when booting with Ubuntu 11.10 memory stick, no speed problems Anyway, I performed the memory tests suggested. But before doing it, and to check out any possibility of hardware issues on the hard drive, I did the following: (1) purchased a new hard drive enclosure and moved my hard drive to it, (2) purchased a new USB cable and used it to connect my hard drive/enclosure setup to a different USB port on my pc. Then, I performed speed tests with 1 Gig, 2 Gigs and 3 Gigs of RAM with my Ubuntu 10.04 OS. Ubuntu 10.04 worked well when booted with 1 Gig or 2 Gigs of RAM. When I increased to 3 Gigs, it slowed down to a crawl. I can't understand the relationship between an increase of 1 Gig and the effect it has in Ubuntu 10.04. This doesn't happen with Ubuntu 10.10 and 11.10. Unfortunately for me, Ubuntu 10.04 is my principal work operating system. So, I need a solution for this. Hardware and system information: DELL Precision 670 2 internal SATA Hard drives Audigy 2 ZS audio system Factory OS: Windows XP Professional SP3 NVidia 8400 GTS video card More info: williepabon@WP-WrkStation:~$ uname -a Linux WP-WrkStation 2.6.32-38-generic #83-Ubuntu SMP Wed Jan 4 11:13:04 UTC 2012 i686 GNU/Linux williepabon@WP-WrkStation:~$ lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS Release: 10.04 Codename: lucid Speed test with the 3 Gigs of RAM installed: williepabon@WP-WrkStation:~$ sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdc [sudo] password for williepabon: /dev/sdc: Timing cached reads: 84 MB in 2.00 seconds = 41.96 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 4 MB in 3.81 seconds = 1.05 MB/sec This is a very slow transfer rate from a hard drive. I will really appreciate a solution or a work around for this problem. I know that that there are users that have Ubuntu 10.04 with 3 Gigs or more of RAM and they don't have this problem. Same question asked on Launchpad for reference.

  Read the article

• SAN with iSCSI-Target Performance Horrendous

  - by Justin

  We have a poor man's SAN setup in a 1U Ubuntu server running iSCSI-Target with two 300GB drives in RAID-0. We then are using it for block level storage for virtual machines. The hypervisor is connected to the SAN via gigabit on a dedicated VLAN and interfaces. We only have a single virtual machine setup and doing some benchmarks. If we run hdparm -t /dev/sda1 from the virtual machine, we get 'ok' performance of 75MB/s from the virtual machine to the SAN. Then we basically compile a package with ./configure and make. Things start ok, but then all the sudden the load average on the SAN grows to 7+ and things slow down to a crawl. When we SSH into the SAN and run top, sure the load is 7+, but the CPU usage is basically nothing, also the server has 1.5GB of memory available. When we kill the compile on the virtual machine, slowly the LOAD on the SAN goes back to sub 1 figures. What in the world is causing this? How can we diagnosis this further? Here are two screenshot from the SAN during high load. 1> Output of iotop on the SAN: 2> Output of top on the SAN:

  Read the article

• Bad sectors, S.M.A.R.T., SpinRite, firmware on platter and drive id questions.

  - by Christopher Galpin

  Is it possible for S.M.A.R.T. to give false readings (say I was fiddling with lots of recovery programs, transfers, so on and so forth) or is it absolutely a read-only direct correlation to the physical status of a drive? Does SpinRite level 5 "recover bad sectors" operate on those marked at the factory? Are they on the same level as your generic bad sector, with SpinRite thus having full access? (Also I'm curious if SMART's bad sector count is zero'd afterward or if it includes factory marked sectors.) The main firmware of some drives, like a WD Passport is stored on the platter. How is it protected? Is it through marking them as bad sectors? If so, I'm wondering if SpinRite's sector recovery could bring about firmware corruption on these drives. Is the failure of a drive to report valid identity information (hdparm -I /dev/xx) consistent with corrupted firmware, or just general disk failure? I may be misunderstanding the role of firmware here. I feel I've read a drive's identity information is on the platter, just like the partition tables and so on. Is this true? (Apologizes if this is more appropriate for SuperUser.)

  Read the article

• Home server hard drive: 186k start-stop cycles in 325 days?

  - by j-g-faustus

  I set up a home server about a year ago, using Ubuntu server (10.04 LTS at the moment), four disks in RAID 5 for storage (WD Green 1.5 TB) and a laptop drive for the OS. Today the output of smartctl, a command line utility for checking the SMART attributes of a hard drive, tells me that the primary OS drive has had no less than 186,000 start-stop cycles in 325 days and may be nearing the end of its lifespan. The smartctl output is in "normalized values", in this case a number between 200 and 000, where 200 is "brand new" and 000 means "worn out". My disk gets 001. So I wonder what happened: 186k start/stop cycles in 7820 hours is about one start/stop per 2.5 minutes around the clock. This seems somewhat excessive for a computer that sees actual use once or twice per day. (The RAID disks are normal, averaging to one start/stop per day, as expected.) Does anyone have similar experiences, or pointers to what might be the issue here? Specifically I'd like to know Why the massive start/stop count? Do I have some sort of configuration issue? Could there be a background service that is causing trouble? Could having a laptop disk as the OS drive be part of the problem? Can anyone confirm or deny this? Here is the /etc/hdparm.conf configuration /dev/sda { apm = 127 spindown_time = 120 } and the most relevant parts of smartctl --attributes /dev/sda: smartctl version 5.38 [x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x002f 200 200 051 Pre-fail Always - 0 4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 185875 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 090 090 000 Old_age Always - 7820 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 109 193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 118 118 000 Old_age Always - 246833 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 107 098 000 Old_age Always - 36 As I generally prefer my drives to last more than a year, any advice is appreciated.

  Read the article

• No power save on external hard drive - How to implement?

  - by blastawaythewall

  I recently bought a new 3.5" USB external hard drive which I thought had a power save feature on it, but it turns out that it doesn't. So whether it's being used or not, it spins, which wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't so loud and didn't get really really hot. After doing some research, it seems like what controls this is the enclosure of the hard drive and not the drive itself or the OS (although I suspect that's not entirely true). I attempted to use the "hdparm" utility but it couldn't identify my externals. Just to be clear, I'm defining power save as a hard drive spinning down after a certain time period of not being used (read from/written to). Also, I have other externals that do this, so it's not a problem from my computer. Here's my question: Is there a way to implement a power save-like feature on my hard drive through software, OS settings, or anything else? Here's some details: Running: Windows XP Home SP2 HD Model: Cavalry CAUM-B-OTB 2TB (although the website only lists 1TB max) Inside: Hitachi Deskstar 7K2000 (HDS722020ALA330) (I would link, but new users can only post 1) Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Why I cannot copy install.wim from Windows 7 ISO to USB (in linux env)

  - by fastreload

  I need to make a USB bootable disk of Windows 7 ISO. My USB is formatted to NTFS, ISO is not corrupt. I can copy install.wim elsewhere but I cannot copy it to USB. I even tried rsync. rsync error sources/install.wim rsync: writefd_unbuffered failed to write 4 bytes to socket [sender]: Broken pipe (32) rsync: write failed on "/media/52E866F5450158A4/sources/install.wim": Input/output error (5) rsync error: error in file IO (code 11) at receiver.c(322) [receiver=3.0.8] Stat for windows.vim File: `X15-65732 (2)/sources/install.wim' Size: 2188587580 Blocks: 4274600 IO Block: 4096 regular file Device: 801h/2049d Inode: 671984 Links: 1 Access: (0664/-rw-rw-r--) Uid: ( 1000/ umur) Gid: ( 1000/ umur) Access: 2011-10-17 22:59:54.754619736 +0300 Modify: 2009-07-14 12:26:40.000000000 +0300 Change: 2011-10-17 22:55:47.327358410 +0300 fdisk -l Disk /dev/sdd: 8103 MB, 8103395328 bytes 196 heads, 32 sectors/track, 2523 cylinders, total 15826944 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xc3072e18 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 * 32 15826943 7913456 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT hdparm -I /dev/sdd: SG_IO: bad/missing sense data, sb[]: 70 00 05 00 00 00 00 0a 00 00 00 00 20 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ATA device, with non-removable media Model Number: UF?F?A????U]r???U u??tF?f?`~ Serial Number: ?@??~| Firmware Revision: ????V? Media Serial Num: $I?vnladip raititnot baelErrrol aoidgn Media Manufacturer: o eparitgns syetmiM Standards: Used: unknown (minor revision code 0x0c75) Supported: 12 8 6 Likely used: 12 Configuration: Logical max current cylinders 17218 0 heads 0 0 sectors/track 128 0 -- Logical/Physical Sector size: 512 bytes device size with M = 1024*1024: 0 MBytes device size with M = 1000*1000: 0 MBytes cache/buffer size = unknown Capabilities: IORDY(may be)(cannot be disabled) Queue depth: 11 Standby timer values: spec'd by Vendor R/W multiple sector transfer: Max = 0 Current = ? Recommended acoustic management value: 254, current value: 62 DMA: not supported PIO: unknown * reserved 69[0] * reserved 69[1] * reserved 69[3] * reserved 69[4] * reserved 69[7] Security: Master password revision code = 60253 not supported not enabled not locked not frozen not expired: security count not supported: enhanced erase 71112min for SECURITY ERASE UNIT. 172min for ENHANCED SECURITY ERASE UNIT. Integrity word not set (found 0xaa55, expected 0x80a5)

  Read the article

• Decrease in disk performance after partitioning and encryption, is this much of a drop normal?

  - by Biohazard

  I have a server that I only have remote access to. Earlier in the week I repartitioned the 2 disk raid as follows: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt 363G 1.8G 343G 1% / tmpfs 2.0G 0 2.0G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 2.0G 140K 2.0G 1% /dev tmpfs 2.0G 0 2.0G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda5 461M 26M 412M 6% /boot /dev/sda7 179G 8.6G 162G 6% /data The raid consists of 2 x 300gb SAS 15k disks. Prior to the changes I made, it was being used as a single unencrypted root parition and hdparm -t /dev/sda was giving readings around 240mb/s, which I still get if I do it now: /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 730 MB in 3.00 seconds = 243.06 MB/sec Since the repartition and encryption, I get the following on the separate partitions: Unencrypted /dev/sda7: /dev/sda7: Timing buffered disk reads: 540 MB in 3.00 seconds = 179.78 MB/sec Unencrypted /dev/sda5: /dev/sda5: Timing buffered disk reads: 476 MB in 2.55 seconds = 186.86 MB/sec Encrypted /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt: /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt: Timing buffered disk reads: 150 MB in 3.03 seconds = 49.54 MB/sec I expected a drop in performance on the encrypted partition, but not that much, but I didn't expect I would get a drop in performance on the other partitions at all. The other hardware in the server is: 2 x Quad Core Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz and 4gb RAM $ cat /proc/scsi/scsi Attached devices: Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 32 Lun: 00 Vendor: DP Model: BACKPLANE Rev: 1.05 Type: Enclosure ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Host: scsi0 Channel: 02 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: DELL Model: PERC 6/i Rev: 1.11 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: HL-DT-ST Model: CD-ROM GCR-8240N Rev: 1.10 Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 05 I'm guessing this means the server has a PERC 6/i RAID controller? The encryption was done with default settings during debian 6 installation. I can't recall the exact specifics and am not sure how I go about finding them? Thanks

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4  | Next Page >