Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage > #2297
| From | Arno <me@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage |
| Subject | Re: IDE or AHCI ? |
| Date | 2012-01-06 20:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9mp2dlFb30U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <4f046249$1@news.bnb-lp.com> <9mjrq7F90aU1@mid.individual.net> <5YadnVh378gqYJjSnZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@giganews.com> <9mnj16F3v8U1@mid.individual.net> <je6ri9$b5u$1@dont-email.me> |
Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On 6/01/2012 5:35 PM, Rod Speed wrote: >> Yousuf Khan wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>> Yousuf Khan wrote >>>>> David Brown wrote >> >>>>>> NCQ won't make a significant difference in Linux, since it has >>>>>> always had good algorithms to order disk accesses to minimise head >>>>>> movement. It will sometimes make things worse, such as when the OS >>>>>> wants to enforce a particular order (for transactions to filesystem >>>>>> journals, for example). And NCQ doesn't help windows much either - >>>>>> after all, it only applies when you do more than one thing at a time. >> >>>>> I find that it doesn't even help even when multitasking. >> >>>> The benchmarks clearly show that it does. >> >>>> Not very dramatically tho. >> >>> Too bad you can't run benchmarks as your applications. >> >> You can however use what you care about the speed of as the benchmark. >> >>>>> I monitor the disk subsection of the Resource Monitor regularly, >>>>> and very often when the disk is busy the Disk Queue Length is over 1.00 (meaning more than 1 process is actively >>>>> waiting on the disk) and the Active Time is pegged near 100%. >> >>>> Doesnt mean that NCQ doesnt help in that situaiton. >> >>> When I'm talking about the disk queue being higher than 1.00, I don't mean just something minor like 1.01, or 1.10, >>> but I'm talking about 5.00, or even 10.00! There could be 10 process waiting on the disk queue at any given time. >> >> I just dont believe that that happens all that much for long to matter. >> >>> This normally happens during boot-up time, >> >> Like I have said to you before, anyone with even half a clue >> boots so rarely that that situation is completely irrelevant. If >> you care about the speed of your system, the only thing that >> makes any sense at all is to only boot very rarely, weeks or >> months apart, and suspend or hibernate, not shutdown. > I turn my computers off when not in use. No point using electricity when > I'm not using the computer. I turn the power off at the UPS but not at > the wall socket. Waiting for a bootup is no great pain. I walk past my > computer, hit a few buttons, do a few other things and by the time I > have finished that, the beast is up and ready. > I've yet to see Windows last months without a complete shutdown. Friends > of mine are forced to reboot often because Windows gets itself tied up > in knots. Linux, on the other hand, can go for years without even > suspending or hibernating. Windows was never intended as a server OS. It still shows. There is a lot that cannot be done on Windows without a shurdown. Machines get slower and slower with uptime. I know a few people that administrate Windows servers, and they usually do scheduled reboots every 30 days or so. Longest uptime I had with with Linux server/firewall box was 400 days, then I replaced the kernel. No issues at that time despite constant i/o and network load during the day. This experience is fairly typical. Still, for my desktop system I shut down Linux as well. Hibernating is at the very least a security risk and basically unneccessary. I do the same as you, 1-2 minutes are not hard to pass. >> Even if you are silly enough to religiously update as often as you can, >> any reboot involved should happen when you arent using the system. >> >>> but it doesn't take very long for the disk queue to kick up to the stratosphere at any time. >> >> Thats just plain wrong with numbers like that. >> >>> Just a few apps trying to access the same disk at the same time, and you got major delays. >> >> Thats just plain wrong with modern hard drives. Very >> minor delays in fact with modern fast seeking drives. > You don't know what you're talking about. As usual for him. Even the fastest stinning disks can be brought to their knees with a few processes that are I/O intensive. (That means aggregated delivered I/O bandwidth is far lower than the maximum.) For SSDs the situation is different at least for large accesses. For small accesses you can run into the same problem. > I have modern fast seeking > drives in all my computers bar my Powermac and they ALL bog down when > accessed by multiple programs at the same time. I suggest you do a few > simple experiments to prove this to yourself. Do you reckon the seek > limitations of mechanical hard drives might be the reason SSDs are so > popular in applications where speed is paramount? Or even RAM-disks in some applications. At least before SSDs became cheap. Don't worry about Rod, he is not using any kind of understanding to post his opinions, he uses the parrot model with some obscure selction function. Most of us have him filtered out. Arno -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@wagner.name GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F ---- Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans
Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
IDE or AHCI ? Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com> - 2012-01-03 12:30 -0600
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-03 21:05 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "arno fucker" <af@arnofucker.com> - 2012-01-04 12:41 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-04 12:58 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-04 00:07 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-01-04 08:53 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-04 20:32 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-01-04 14:44 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 07:37 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-04 22:56 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 09:48 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> - 2012-01-04 21:40 -0800
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-05 05:37 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 17:37 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-04 09:29 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-01-04 16:04 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-04 19:19 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-04 23:14 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-05 08:47 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 07:51 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-04 19:16 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 07:41 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-05 14:44 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 17:35 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-01-07 00:05 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-06 20:04 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-06 21:13 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net> - 2012-01-06 20:42 -0600
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-07 13:48 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-07 14:09 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-07 14:36 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-01-08 02:11 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 12:06 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-09 16:27 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 17:36 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 17:41 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Winniethepooh@100acrewoods.net (GMAN) - 2012-01-09 19:07 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-09 20:12 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 21:00 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 11:31 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-07 17:10 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-10 14:18 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 11:23 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-09 16:30 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-09 20:16 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net> - 2012-01-09 17:13 -0600
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-07 08:11 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-01-08 01:23 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 06:43 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? JW <none@dev.null> - 2012-01-09 05:23 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 10:24 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 09:34 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 20:04 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 15:33 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-06 09:48 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 11:35 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-09 20:23 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-10 11:31 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-20 06:54 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-04 19:14 +0000
csiph-web