Re: usb2 port gets very slow on 2-gig Flash Drive.
mount -o loop -t msds zenstone2g.img /mnt/zenstoneimg
mount -o loop -t msdos zenstone2g.img /mnt/zenstoneimg
Material Safety Data Sheets do not play a part here. :-) You might
also try -t vfat, one of them should work.
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 9:20 AM, elijah r. <email@example.com> wrote:
> Say your flash disk is /dev/sdc and has 1 FAT partition where the
> music is stored:
> cd ~
> dd if=/dev/sdc1 of=zenstone2g.img bs=64M
> mkdir /mnt/zenstoneimg
> mount -o loop -t msds zenstone2g.img /mnt/zenstoneimg
> ---delete anything in /mnt/zenstoneimg/music you don't want -----
> cp -R /path/to/my/music/* /mnt/zenstoneimg/music/
> umount /mnt/zenstoneimg
> dd if=zenstone2g.img of=/dev/sdc1 bs=64M
> You'd only need to run the commands before "mount" once, then keep the
> image around for the future.
> I don't actually know if this will speed things up, but the idea is
> that you are bypassing the filesystem layer over the USB bottleneck
> for disk writes.
> You make all the filesystem changes to a disk image on your hard disk,
> then you stream the bits in that image to the flash disk.
> The "bs=64M" is the block size and can be increased or decreased
> depending on your situation. AFAIK, it basically acts like a buffer
> in situations like this.
> Be very careful with the syntax of dd; one misplaced character and you
> could wipe your hard disk or flash drive.
> Just an idea. Let me know if it works out.
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Martin McCormick
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I needed to reload the flash drive on a Zenstone 2-gig mp3
>> player. I have noticed that when the drive is full, operations
>> all still work, but take much longer than one might expect which
>> probably has something to do with the fat32 file system and size
>> of the FAT table.
>> I started by doing rm -r -f music which is the one and
>> only main directory. That took about 2 hours to complete and
>> then it was time to reload it from the Linux computer.
>> The Linux computer is a 500-MHZ Pentium running a 2.6.5
>> kernel and the usb2 port is, by definition 13 Mb so it is slow,
>> about 10-meg Ethernet slow under normal conditions.
>> What actually happens is much worse. After doing the rm
>> -r -f, I started with an empty drive but the tar program started
>> running very slowly. It takes at times, 10 minutes to load one
>> tune that would normally play in 2 or 3 minutes.
>> Just for fun, I let it plod slowly along and it has been
>> running now for about 36 hours and is 75% complete but what is
>> If I look at the health of the system, it isn't that bad
>> all be it busy.
>> $ uptime
>> 07:21:58 up 2 days, 23:37, 2 users, load average: 4.00, 4.13, 4.19
>> It is July 24 and ps ax -Olstart shows me that tar has
>> been running a very long time:
>> 22986 Tue Jul 22 23:35:01 2008 D pts/13 00:00:40 tar xf /home/martin/musicmain.tar
>> I tried renic-ing tar and the usb mass storage daemon
>> which has had no effect, either good or bad.
>> I do remember once that if there is a time lapse of
>> several minutes between the rm -r -f command to wipe the FAT
>> table clean and the tar command that initial performance is much
>> better so there must be a cleanup routine going on somewhere.
>> This is also true if you unmount the drive and remount it empty.
>> I seem to remember that it only took a couple of hours to reload
>> the entire drive when I did things that way.
>> I did a top command and I am either missing something or nothing
>> much is wrong:
>> Tasks: 42 total, 2 running, 40 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
>> Cpu(s): 0.3% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 99.7% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si
>> Mem: 126424k total, 124572k used, 1852k free, 1604k buffers
>> Swap: 377488k total, 0k used, 377488k free, 102308k cached
>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
>> 23560 martin 16 0 2160 1084 1880 R 0.3 0.9 0:00.03 top
>> 1 root 16 0 1492 528 1336 S 0.0 0.4 0:07.26 init
>> 2 root 34 19 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:12.13 ksoftirqd/0
>> 3 root 5 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 events/0
>> 4 root 5 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:04.02 kblockd/0
>> 10 root 7 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 aio/0
>> 9 root 15 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:22.06 kswapd0
>> 11 root 25 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 jfsIO
>> I plan to let this tar command run its natural course to see
>> what happens, but is there anything I can do with the existing
>> system to optimise the performance?
>> Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK
>> Systems Engineer
>> OSU Information Technology Department Network Operations Group
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com