Shiro
BH-C
So drive actually formatted as ext3 (I'd assumed it was ext4 as used solo2 to initialize) and getting good speeds in Solo2?
The standard enigma2 formatting system is in ext3.
As i told in bh 2.0.5 it will be ext4
So drive actually formatted as ext3 (I'd assumed it was ext4 as used solo2 to initialize) and getting good speeds in Solo2?
Sorry, was confused!The standard enigma2 formatting system is in ext3.
As i told in bh 2.0.5 it will be ext4
I was using a mates box earlier shiro... this is mine now same model hdd and box..seems to be a difference tho thanks
Before format (test 1) ext3
root@bm750:~# cd /media/hdd
root@bm750:/media/hdd# dd if=/dev/zero of=./output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 56.766664 seconds, 36.1MB/s
=========================================
=========================================
After format to ext4 (test 1) ext4
root@bm750:~# cd /media/hdd
root@bm750:/media/hdd# dd if=/dev/zero of=./output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 31.084794 seconds, 65.9MB/s
The theoretical limit of the SATA II is 384 MB/s then the benefits of the bus SATA3 only be obtained with a solid state drive.
With the normal hard drives there are not differences in performance between SATA2 and SATA3 box.
Also the old Vu+ models (DUO-UNO-ULTIMO) have the SATAII bus, so if you use a normal disk (SATA2 o SATA3 NOT SSD) the performance will be the same as the SOLO2-DUO2.Yes it's true.
Anyway solo2 and duo2 seems to have better performances in hdd managment.
Also the old Vu+ models (DUO-UNO-ULTIMO) have the SATAII bus, so if you use a normal disk (SATA2 o SATA3 NOT SSD) the performance will be the same as the SOLO2-DUO2.
But to take advantage of the SATA3 speed necessarily need a solid state drive.
With my hdd model (WD AV25 BUCT) i have a similar performance between Notebook (Llano quad core,SATA2) and SOLO2.....No the hdd performances are better in solo2 and duo2 and much better on a desktop Pc.
The hdd performances depend from many variables and the hardware of Duo2 and Solo2 is more powerful than previous models.
With my hdd model (WD AV25 BUCT) i have a similar performance between Notebook (Llano quad core,SATA2) and SOLO2.....
Atemp$ dd if=/dev/zero of=./output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 record dentro
262144+0 record fuori
2147483648 byte (2,1 GB) copiati, 4,41721 s, 486 MB/s
We are going off topic but just to show something flying
Code:Atemp$ dd if=/dev/zero of=./output.img bs=8k count=256k 262144+0 record dentro 262144+0 record fuori 2147483648 byte (2,1 GB) copiati, 4,41721 s, 486 MB/s
2147483648 byte (2,1 GB) copiati, 4,41721 s, 486 MB/s
2147483648 byte (2,1 GB) copiati, 4,44776 s, 483 MB/s
2147483648 byte (2,1 GB) copiati, 4,32085 s, 497 MB/s
My Vu+ box:solo2
Hdd Vendor model:Toshiba MQ01ABD0
Capacity:500 gb
Size:2,5"
External / Internal:internal
Filesystem:ext3
Test result:
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 34.374048 seconds, 59.6MB/s
My Vu+ box: Solo2
Hdd Vendor model: Toshiba MQ01ABD050
Capacity: 500 GB
Size: 2,5"
External / Internal: Internal
Filesystem: ext3
Test result:
Code:262144+0 records in 262144+0 records out 2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 73.357324 seconds, 27.9MB/s
Note: Installed and formatted 7 months ago.
Same boxes, the same disks. Booh?
@krca: Did you test on BH2.0.4? Fresh formatted in ext3?
root@vuuno:/media/hdd# dd if=/dev/zero of=./output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 48.712161 seconds, 42.0MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 44.967611 seconds, 45.5MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 45.823478 seconds, 44.7MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 44.679826 seconds, 45.8MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 44.532106 seconds, 46.0MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 47.481253 seconds, 43.1MB/s
root@vuuno:/media/hdd# dd if=/dev/zero of=./output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 32.436546 seconds, 63.1MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 32.393913 seconds, 63.2MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 32.146557 seconds, 63.7MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 32.105352 seconds, 63.8MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 32.101931 seconds, 63.8MB/s
2147483648 bytes (2.0GB) copied, 32.076711 seconds, 63.8MB/s