Pinepain, it's very kind of you to rtfm me without actually reading my
comment, thank you very much. First of all there were no 'a lot of small
files' not in any single of my tests. I always used large files,
250-350MB in size. And ntfs is not stone age, it is currently used by my
windows partition, and the big file for testing was pagefile.sys
(surprising, no? it's also not heavily fragment there). Also never in my
tests I actually used to copy to hdd, because then it would be
read+write speed (minus a delta because some data would stay in cache),
writing data to /dev/null can have a small delta (dependent on buffer
size though), but still, difference between 5MB/s and 20MB/s [on the
same system with different files, one was downloaded with ktorrent
(heavily fragmented and slow), another downloaded with wget (shows
excellent throughput, supposedly it's not fragmented)] is not imaginary,
don't you think? And I doubt I have a spare connector in my laptop's
hard drive bay.

My experience with gutsy (after dist-upgrading from feisty) was
extremely crawling and painful under even slightest disk load for past
two months (and not just mine I assume, reading relevant bug reports),
heavy fragmentation can also explain why people stop experiencing
performance problems after they do clean reinstall.

P.S. Yes, I upgraded my bios and found that I do have those options in
there, but I don't know if that would help at all, because I wiped my
ubuntu installation, sorry. But seeing hdparm -i that I attached above I
doubt it, because it shows udma5 is already currently selected mode.

-- 
Slow SATA performance
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/119730
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to