Re: Help with hdparm

[chainy <chainy@infonegocio.com>]

I understand your opinion, but in this particular case I think you did not 
understand the thread.

I read a bunch of times many articles about hdparm that always say the same 
things, the theory about hdparm and some examples and/or configurations.  But 
following each one step by step I end up with the same results.

We are talking about a particular case of configuration with hdparm that I 
think is worthy for 2 reasons.  Obviously the first one is because I am 
affected by it and if it solves I, and everybody who follows this list will 
be able to give a good answer when someone else asks the same question or 
report a bug that could be recieved with interest.

Thanks for your time.

Chainy.

On Tuesday 27 August 2002 21:58, Maya wrote:
> Inbox
> X-Mutt-Fcc: Sentbox
> Lines: 59
> Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:07:39 -0000
> Resent-Message-ID: <VBj2DC.A.PKB.H58a9@murphy>
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> X-Mailing-List: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/230151
> X-Loop: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> List-Post: <mailto:debian-user@lists.debian.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe:
> <mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=subscribe>
> List-Unsubscribe:
> <mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> Precedence: list
> Resent-Sender: debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
>
> I follow this mailing list as much as I can; most of the time I find
> questions for which someone has a better answer or problem that have
> already been resolved. But this one is somewhat new: It is a thread
> that seems be well in advance and fearful of redundancy I hesitated to
> give my opinion, nevertheless here is my two words:
>
> O'REILLY made a publication about this very subject, "Speeding up Linux
> Using hdparm", the URL is:
> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/linux/2000/06029/hdparm.html
>
> Good luck!!
>
> On 2002.08.27 07:49 Bob Proulx wrote:
> > chainy <chainy@infonegocio.com> [2002-08-27 04:26:55 +0200]:
> > > After spending a lot of time configuring hdparm (it begins to feel
> >
> > like some
> >
> > > kind of addiction to get better results) I found that my results are
> >
> > quite
> >
> > > modest, and feels like it should go faster.
> > >
> > > I have a 1st Mainboard SD11 with an AMD Athlon 500 Mhz.  The HD:
> >
> > Seagate 600
> >
> > > GB 7200 rpm.
> >
> > I have an FIC SD11 as well but with an Athlon 950 MHz.  I am running a
> > 2.4.18 kernel.  DMA is enabled by default in the kernel for me.
> > (Which I remember as needing to turn on with previous kernels.)  I
> > have a Maxtor ATA/100 capable 60GB 7200 rpm currently installed and
> > these are my results.
> >
> > hdparm -Tt /dev/hda
> >
> >  Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  0.84 seconds =152.38 MB/sec
> >  Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  1.96 seconds = 32.65 MB/sec
> >
> > hdparm /dev/hda
> >
> > /dev/hda:
> >  multcount    = 16 (on)
> >  I/O support  =  1 (32-bit)
> >  unmaskirq    =  1 (on)
> >  using_dma    =  1 (on)
> >  keepsettings =  0 (off)
> >  nowerr       =  0 (off)
> >  readonly     =  0 (off)
> >  readahead    =  8 (on)
> >  geometry     = 7299/255/63, sectors = 117266688, start = 0
> >  busstate     =  1 (on)
> >
> > > The mainboard people swears it's capable of ata/66 but i am only
> >
> > getting
> >
> > > ata/33 to work.
> >
> > FIC does claim that works ATA/66 works.  But I have never gotten that
> > speed out of my motherboard drive combination.  Otherwise it has been
> > a reliable performer for me.
> >
> > Bob