Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #19938 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-12-16 15:53 +0000 |
| Last post | 2013-12-22 08:43 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 66 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps
Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-16 15:53 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Ned Mantei <ned.mantei@biol.ethz.ch> - 2013-12-16 17:50 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> - 2013-12-19 17:55 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-20 07:12 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-12-19 23:36 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-20 09:24 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs android <here@there.was> - 2013-12-20 10:38 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-20 09:47 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs android <here@there.was> - 2013-12-20 10:58 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-20 12:24 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs android <here@there.was> - 2013-12-20 13:49 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-20 12:58 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2013-12-20 10:04 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> - 2013-12-20 21:49 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-21 13:11 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2013-12-21 08:45 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2013-12-21 09:25 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 08:42 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 08:40 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-21 13:10 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs PhillipJones <pjonescet@comcast.net> - 2013-12-21 19:58 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-12-21 23:13 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 08:44 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2013-12-22 14:33 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-12-20 20:23 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-21 14:44 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-12-22 00:19 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs android <here@there.was> - 2013-12-22 10:07 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 09:12 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs android <here@there.was> - 2013-12-22 10:28 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 12:07 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-12-22 08:11 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 16:50 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2013-12-22 14:42 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 23:18 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-12-22 15:38 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs android <here@there.was> - 2013-12-22 16:44 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-12-22 23:28 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs android <here@there.was> - 2013-12-23 16:59 +0100
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 16:48 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-12-22 19:59 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-12-22 23:29 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-23 11:04 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-12-23 15:07 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-23 17:23 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-12-23 18:44 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2013-12-23 18:58 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-12-23 16:11 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-26 13:19 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-12-26 22:35 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> - 2013-12-23 20:55 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> - 2013-12-23 20:59 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-26 13:27 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2013-12-22 14:38 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 23:17 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2013-12-22 15:46 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-23 11:03 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2013-12-23 13:19 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-26 13:26 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-12-26 12:17 -0800
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2013-12-20 09:37 -0700
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-21 13:10 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> - 2013-12-20 21:47 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-21 14:43 +0000
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> - 2013-12-21 11:54 -0500
Re: Photos in iPhoto shared between Macs Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-12-22 08:43 +0000
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-22 19:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bhouk6F2rt9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #20112 |
On 2013-12-22, Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > In article <slrnlbe1r0.1g3m.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > >> > It's your money really. No vendor has these 4 things right now. >> >> In point of fact, Drobo has a case for 4 or 5 2.5" drives. >> >> One second... >> >> <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=876458&is=REG&Q=&A=details> >> >> Thunderbolt and USB3. Tada! > > Hmmm, four 2.5" bays, can I put SSD's in them? And for obvious reasons it's > not bus-powered. > > I've had a Drobo once, it was *dog slow*. Perhaps they're faster these > days? A great benefit with them is that they're hotswappable and you can > mix drive make/sizes as you please. But they also require special software > to manage... > > It's the best suggestions thus far, thanks Lewis. It's an SSD enclosure - it's not slow. ; ) -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-22 23:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbetel.1t45.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #20112 |
In message <slrnlbe62o.2ut.mr@irc.sandman.net> Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > In article <slrnlbe1r0.1g3m.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> > It's your money really. No vendor has these 4 things right now. >> >> In point of fact, Drobo has a case for 4 or 5 2.5" drives. >> >> One second... >> >> <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=876458&is=REG&Q=&A=details> >> >> Thunderbolt and USB3. Tada! > Hmmm, four 2.5" bays, can I put SSD's in them? And for obvious reasons it's > not bus-powered. > I've had a Drobo once, it was *dog slow*. Perhaps they're faster these > days? A great benefit with them is that they're hotswappable and you can > mix drive make/sizes as you please. But they also require special software > to manage... So far the Drobo 5N is fast. Can't speak to any other Drobo products. -- It was long ago and it was far away / And it was so much better than it is today
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 11:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbg6a5.6mt.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| In reply to | #20123 |
In article <slrnlbetel.1t45.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > In message <slrnlbe62o.2ut.mr@irc.sandman.net> > Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > > In article <slrnlbe1r0.1g3m.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > >> > It's your money really. No vendor has these 4 things right now. > >> > >> In point of fact, Drobo has a case for 4 or 5 2.5" drives. > >> > >> One second... > >> > >> <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=876458&is=REG&Q=&A=details> > >> > >> Thunderbolt and USB3. Tada! > > > Hmmm, four 2.5" bays, can I put SSD's in them? And for obvious reasons it's > > not bus-powered. > > > I've had a Drobo once, it was *dog slow*. Perhaps they're faster these > > days? A great benefit with them is that they're hotswappable and you can > > mix drive make/sizes as you please. But they also require special software > > to manage... > > So far the Drobo 5N is fast. Can't speak to any other Drobo products. What performance do you get out of it? R/W speeds? What disks do you use in it? -- Sandman[.net]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 15:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbgkdo.1vok.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #20137 |
In message <slrnlbg6a5.6mt.mr@irc.sandman.net> Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > In article <slrnlbetel.1t45.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> In message <slrnlbe62o.2ut.mr@irc.sandman.net> >> Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: >> > In article <slrnlbe1r0.1g3m.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> >> >> > It's your money really. No vendor has these 4 things right now. >> >> >> >> In point of fact, Drobo has a case for 4 or 5 2.5" drives. >> >> >> >> One second... >> >> >> >> <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=876458&is=REG&Q=&A=details> >> >> >> >> Thunderbolt and USB3. Tada! >> >> > Hmmm, four 2.5" bays, can I put SSD's in them? And for obvious reasons it's >> > not bus-powered. >> >> > I've had a Drobo once, it was *dog slow*. Perhaps they're faster these >> > days? A great benefit with them is that they're hotswappable and you can >> > mix drive make/sizes as you please. But they also require special software >> > to manage... >> >> So far the Drobo 5N is fast. Can't speak to any other Drobo products. > What performance do you get out of it? R/W speeds? What disks do you use in > it? I have 4TB drives in it and it sits off my main switch. I get, at times, ~40MB/s writing to it. I have not read much from it because I'm still filling it up. I am also reading from one network mounted volume while writing to the Drobo. Also, this is from a machine that is in use for other things at the same time and I haven't taken any efforts to maximize my throughput. It's as fast as writing to any other networked drives on my LAN (which, again, is not optimized). -- 'Where do shadows come from? That's where the wind is blowing!' --Colour of Magic
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 17:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbgsg1.7ol.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| In reply to | #20140 |
In article <slrnlbgkdo.1vok.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > What performance do you get out of it? R/W speeds? What disks do you use in > > it? > > I have 4TB drives in it and it sits off my main switch. I get, at times, > ~40MB/s writing to it. I have not read much from it because I'm still > filling it up. I am also reading from one network mounted volume while > writing to the Drobo. > > Also, this is from a machine that is in use for other things at the same > time and I haven't taken any efforts to maximize my throughput. It's as > fast as writing to any other networked drives on my LAN (which, again, > is not optimized). Yeah, that's pretty slow, comparable to about USB2 speed. I need something substantially faster than that. Granted, putting SSD in it should increase performance as well, but how much of pentaly does the drobo impose on the speed of the drives? -- Sandman[.net]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 18:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbh14k.21pr.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #20145 |
In message <slrnlbgsg1.7ol.mr@irc.sandman.net> Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > In article <slrnlbgkdo.1vok.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> > What performance do you get out of it? R/W speeds? What disks do you use in >> > it? >> >> I have 4TB drives in it and it sits off my main switch. I get, at times, >> ~40MB/s writing to it. I have not read much from it because I'm still >> filling it up. I am also reading from one network mounted volume while >> writing to the Drobo. >> >> Also, this is from a machine that is in use for other things at the same >> time and I haven't taken any efforts to maximize my throughput. It's as >> fast as writing to any other networked drives on my LAN (which, again, >> is not optimized). > Yeah, that's pretty slow, comparable to about USB2 speed. I never get anywhere near 40MB/s from USB2 drives. 25MB/s is about the max. > I need something substantially faster than that. Granted, putting SSD > in it should increase performance as well, but how much of pentaly > does the drobo impose on the speed of the drives? Like I said, my network is not optimized and I am using the computer for other things at the same time, as well as copying from one network drive to the Drobo, so I think up to 40MB/s is excellent. The Drobo *looks* like it is using something very similar to RAID5. -- Competent? How are we going to compete with that?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 18:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bhrfeqFiosoU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #20147 |
On 2013-12-23, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > In message <slrnlbgsg1.7ol.mr@irc.sandman.net> > Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: >> In article <slrnlbgkdo.1vok.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > >>> > What performance do you get out of it? R/W speeds? What disks do you use in >>> > it? >>> >>> I have 4TB drives in it and it sits off my main switch. I get, at times, >>> ~40MB/s writing to it. I have not read much from it because I'm still >>> filling it up. I am also reading from one network mounted volume while >>> writing to the Drobo. >>> >>> Also, this is from a machine that is in use for other things at the same >>> time and I haven't taken any efforts to maximize my throughput. It's as >>> fast as writing to any other networked drives on my LAN (which, again, >>> is not optimized). > >> Yeah, that's pretty slow, comparable to about USB2 speed. > > I never get anywhere near 40MB/s from USB2 drives. 25MB/s is about the > max. > >> I need something substantially faster than that. Granted, putting SSD >> in it should increase performance as well, but how much of pentaly >> does the drobo impose on the speed of the drives? > > Like I said, my network is not optimized and I am using the computer for > other things at the same time, as well as copying from one network drive > to the Drobo, so I think up to 40MB/s is excellent. > > The Drobo *looks* like it is using something very similar to RAID5. You should always use the best tool for the job, of course; and it does pay to make informed purchasing decisions. According to Drobo, the Drobo 5D and Drobo mini are the models that are best suited for high-performance applications (speed): <http://www.drobo.com/how-it-works/performance-professional/> Assuming you configure one of these units with an SSD as designed, they do seem to deliver very fast performance for such a RAID device. And there seems to be an across-the-board performance boost from the data tiering technology they are using. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 16:11 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <231220131611529756%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #20147 |
In article <slrnlbh14k.21pr.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > I never get anywhere near 40MB/s from USB2 drives. 25MB/s is about the > max. then you need better usb drives or a newer computer. 35mb/s is typical for usb on intel macs. 25 mb/s was typical for powerpc macs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-26 13:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbobb1.ak9.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| In reply to | #20147 |
In article <slrnlbh14k.21pr.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > Yeah, that's pretty slow, comparable to about USB2 speed. > > I never get anywhere near 40MB/s from USB2 drives. 25MB/s is about the > max. Well, about. Especially when comparing to my needs. > > I need something substantially faster than that. Granted, putting SSD > > in it should increase performance as well, but how much of pentaly > > does the drobo impose on the speed of the drives? > > Like I said, my network is not optimized and I am using the computer for > other things at the same time, as well as copying from one network drive > to the Drobo, so I think up to 40MB/s is excellent. I think your network can handle more than one file copy at the time, though, as well as your computer :) > The Drobo *looks* like it is using something very similar to RAID5. Nah, they're using their own RAID filesystem which is what makes them slow, but also allows them to add any type of drive to the mix and they just add the capacity to the file system. Anyway, this blog has tested the mini with mechanical drives: http://onemansblog.com/2013/01/27/drobo-mini-review/ And the result was pretty good. As you can see, his internal SSD was more than twice as fast, but the drobo was no slouch. He didn't test it with four SSD disks, which could possibly surpass the speed of the internal SSD. So it seems that while no speed demon, it has the power to meet my needs. -- Sandman[.net]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-26 22:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbpbq6.66n.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #20206 |
In message <slrnlbobb1.ak9.mr@irc.sandman.net> Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > In article <slrnlbh14k.21pr.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> > Yeah, that's pretty slow, comparable to about USB2 speed. >> >> I never get anywhere near 40MB/s from USB2 drives. 25MB/s is about the >> max. > Well, about. Especially when comparing to my needs. >> > I need something substantially faster than that. Granted, putting SSD >> > in it should increase performance as well, but how much of pentaly >> > does the drobo impose on the speed of the drives? >> >> Like I said, my network is not optimized and I am using the computer for >> other things at the same time, as well as copying from one network drive >> to the Drobo, so I think up to 40MB/s is excellent. > I think your network can handle more than one file copy at the time, > though, as well as your computer :) >> The Drobo *looks* like it is using something very similar to RAID5. > Nah, they're using their own RAID filesystem which is what makes them slow, > but also allows them to add any type of drive to the mix and they just add > the capacity to the file system. They are using their own thing, but it is pretty similar to RAID5. -- Personal isn't the same as important
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 20:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <l9aphl$qq3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20145 |
On 12-23-2013 12:23, Sandman wrote:
> In article <slrnlbgkdo.1vok.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>> What performance do you get out of it? R/W speeds? What disks do you use in
>>> it?
>>
>> I have 4TB drives in it and it sits off my main switch. I get, at times,
>> ~40MB/s writing to it. I have not read much from it because I'm still
>> filling it up. I am also reading from one network mounted volume while
>> writing to the Drobo.
>>
>> Also, this is from a machine that is in use for other things at the same
>> time and I haven't taken any efforts to maximize my throughput. It's as
>> fast as writing to any other networked drives on my LAN (which, again,
>> is not optimized).
>
> Yeah, that's pretty slow, comparable to about USB2 speed. I need something
> substantially faster than that. Granted, putting SSD in it should increase
> performance as well, but how much of pentaly does the drobo impose on the
> speed of the drives?
I recently mentioned elsewhere that rsync reported a transfer rate of
1.36 GB/sec. over a USB 2.
And again, the speed of the drive is only relevant if it is faster than
the interface.
--
Wes Groleau
From the cowardice that shrinks from new truth,
From the laziness that is content with half-truths,
From the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
O God of Truth, deliver us.
--Leslie Dixon Weatherhead
--Rabbi Mordechai M. Kaplan
--ancient prayer
--unknown
--(no attempt at attribution)
(a thousand thanks to someone who can tell me who
really wrote it AND persuade me they're not making it up!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 20:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <l9apqi$qq3$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20163 |
On 12-23-2013 20:55, Wes Groleau wrote:
> I recently mentioned elsewhere that rsync reported a transfer rate of
> 1.36 GB/sec. over a USB 2.
OOPS! ignore that. I had the numbers swapped:
> rsync timed itself at "8339802.92 bytes/sec" for copying 132.5 GB
> And again, the speed of the drive is only relevant if it is faster than
> the interface.
This part is still true.
--
Wes Groleau
From the cowardice that shrinks from new truth,
From the laziness that is content with half-truths,
From the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
O God of Truth, deliver us.
--Leslie Dixon Weatherhead
--Rabbi Mordechai M. Kaplan
--ancient prayer
--unknown
--(no attempt at attribution)
(a thousand thanks to someone who can tell me who
really wrote it AND persuade me they're not making it up!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-26 13:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbobqk.ak9.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| In reply to | #20163 |
In article <l9aphl$qq3$1@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau <Usenet@Grolea.us> wrote: > > Yeah, that's pretty slow, comparable to about USB2 speed. I need something > > substantially faster than that. Granted, putting SSD in it should increase > > performance as well, but how much of pentaly does the drobo impose on the > > speed of the drives? > > I recently mentioned elsewhere that rsync reported a transfer rate of > 1.36 GB/sec. over a USB 2. That would be quite the feat! I saw your followup to this though :) > And again, the speed of the drive is only relevant if it is faster than > the interface. Indeed, which is why I want thunderbolt on it for my thunderbolt-equipped Macs. :) -- Sandman[.net]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-22 14:38 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <l97plh$9df$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #20066 |
On 2013-12-21 14:44:41 +0000, Sandman said: > In article <vilain-B7CBD0.20235820122013@news.individual.net>, Michael > Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote: > >>>>>>> The requirements are: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. SSD >>>>>>> 2. bus-powered >>>>>>> 3. at least 1TB >>>>>>> 4. Thunderbolt + USB2 >>>>>>> >>>>>> USB3 should do the job as it's backward compatible and many enclosures >>>>>> can live on the power that the USB port supplies. Let the OP decide. >>>>> >>>>> ...I am the OP.. >>>> >>>> Oki... It's your money... >>> >>> I've yet to find a product that fits my needs, however. >> >> You probably won't see a 1TB SSD USB drive for consumers. At least not >> until 6TB internal drives go under $100. #2, #3, and #4 (USB2) you can >> have now. >> >> If you want this, you'll have to build it from parts. > > How so? SSD drives are small, slap four 256GB ones toegther in an extern al > enclosure powered over USB/TB and a raid controller. SHould work... I'd > settle with 500GB as well :) Maybe one of these: <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/EliteALmini/RAID/eSATA_FW800_FW400_USB> Though the USB is only USB2, and there's no Thunderbolt. But it's also got eSata and FW800, and there are things like this <http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10574> [That's the LaCie eSata hub, which plugs into your thunderbolt port and gives you a pair of addiional thunderbolt ports as well as a pair of eSata ports - for $200]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-22 23:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbessa.45q.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| In reply to | #20117 |
In article <l97plh$9df$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: > > How so? SSD drives are small, slap four 256GB ones toegther in an extern al > > enclosure powered over USB/TB and a raid controller. SHould work... I'd > > settle with 500GB as well :) > > Maybe one of these: > > <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/EliteALmini/RAID/eSATA_FW800_FW400_USB> Nope, no thunderbolt > Though the USB is only USB2, and there's no Thunderbolt. But it's also got > eSata and FW800, and there are things like this > <http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10574> > [That's the LaCie eSata hub, which plugs into your thunderbolt port and > gives you a pair of addiional thunderbolt ports as well as a pair of > eSata ports - for $200] I want thunderbolt on the drive for my Macs with thunderbolt and USB 3/2 for my iMac that doesn't have Thunderbolt. I have no need for eSata at any point :) -- Sandman[.net]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-22 15:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <l97tl4$pil$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #20120 |
On 2013-12-22 23:17:28 +0000, Sandman said: > In article <l97plh$9df$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread > <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: > >>> How so? SSD drives are small, slap four 256GB ones toegther in an extern al >>> enclosure powered over USB/TB and a raid controller. SHould work... I'd >>> settle with 500GB as well :) >> >> Maybe one of these: >> >> <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/EliteALmini/RAID/eSATA_FW800_FW400_USB> >> > > Nope, no thunderbolt I know, which is why I added this: > >> Though the USB is only USB2, and there's no Thunderbolt. But it's also got >> eSata and FW800, and there are things like this >> <http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10574> >> [That's the LaCie eSata hub, which plugs into your thunderbolt port and >> gives you a pair of addiional thunderbolt ports as well as a pair of >> eSata ports - for $200]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 11:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbg68v.6mt.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| In reply to | #20125 |
In article <l97tl4$pil$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: > On 2013-12-22 23:17:28 +0000, Sandman said: > > > In article <l97plh$9df$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread > > <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: > > > >>> How so? SSD drives are small, slap four 256GB ones toegther in an extern al > >>> enclosure powered over USB/TB and a raid controller. SHould work... I'd > >>> settle with 500GB as well :) > >> > >> Maybe one of these: > >> > >> <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/EliteALmini/RAID/eSATA_FW800_FW400_USB> > >> > > > > Nope, no thunderbolt > > I know, which is why I added this: > > > > > >> Though the USB is only USB2, and there's no Thunderbolt. But it's also got > >> eSata and FW800, and there are things like this > >> <http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10574> > >> [That's the LaCie eSata hub, which plugs into your thunderbolt port and > >> gives you a pair of addiional thunderbolt ports as well as a pair of > >> eSata ports - for $200] Which I replied to with this: I want thunderbolt on the drive for my Macs with thunderbolt and USB 3/2 for my iMac that doesn't have Thunderbolt. I have no need for eSata at any point :) -- Sandman[.net]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-23 13:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <l9a9e0$ntv$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #20136 |
On 2013-12-23 11:03:56 +0000, Sandman said: > In article <l97tl4$pil$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread > <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: > >> On 2013-12-22 23:17:28 +0000, Sandman said: >> >>> In article <l97plh$9df$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread >>> <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: >>> >>>>> How so? SSD drives are small, slap four 256GB ones toegther in an extern al >>>>> enclosure powered over USB/TB and a raid controller. SHould work... I'd >>>>> settle with 500GB as well :) >>>> >>>> Maybe one of these: >>>> >>>> <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/EliteALmini/RAID/eSATA_FW800_FW400_USB> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Nope, no thunderbolt >> >> I know, which is why I added this: >> >> >>> >>>> Though the USB is only USB2, and there's no Thunderbolt. But it's also got >>>> eSata and FW800, and there are things like this >>>> <http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10574> >>>> [That's the LaCie eSata hub, which plugs into your thunderbolt port and >>>> gives you a pair of addiional thunderbolt ports as well as a pair of >>>> eSata ports - for $200] > > Which I replied to with this: > > I want thunderbolt on the drive for my Macs with thunderbolt and USB 3/2 > for my iMac that doesn't have Thunderbolt. I have no need for eSata at any > point :) I'm not sure you're getting it, then. Think of the eSata/Thunderbolt converter as *adding Thunderbolt to the drive* if you must. It's going to be as fast as the drive is capable of managing and certainly not a bottleneck. This gets you not just the fastest possible connection to the desktop, but also a lot more flexibility with additional desktop drives in the future. eSata is just SATA -- how the drives inside the enclosures connect to the enclosures in the first place -- set up so it's accessible. The eSata/Thunderbolt converter is, effectively, identical to having a Thunderbolt enclosure, as you'd asked for in the first place.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sandman <mr@sandman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-26 13:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlbobnp.ak9.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| In reply to | #20156 |
In article <l9a9e0$ntv$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: > > Which I replied to with this: > > > > I want thunderbolt on the drive for my Macs with thunderbolt and USB 3/2 > > for my iMac that doesn't have Thunderbolt. I have no need for eSata at any > > point :) > > I'm not sure you're getting it, then. Think of the eSata/Thunderbolt > converter as *adding Thunderbolt to the drive* if you must. It's going > to be as fast as the drive is capable of managing and certainly not a > bottleneck. This gets you not just the fastest possible connection to > the desktop, but also a lot more flexibility with additional desktop > drives in the future. Yes, I understood that. Let's repeat what I'm looking for, to clear up any confusion. I'm looking for a *mobile* hard drive, that is upwards of 1TB large, with USB2/3 and thunderbolt connection on it. On this I would put my iPhoto library, and I would connect it to two Macs, one that has only USB2 and one that has Thunderbolt. So it would be slow on one Mac and quicker on the other. The product you linked to is a hub that would sit between my Mac and whatever drive I would connect to it, it's a good product but would counteract the entire "mobile" part of my needs, so to speak :) The Drobo Mini seems to be the best contender thus far. It has four drive slots into which I could add four 256GB SSD disks, or even slower mechanical drives. It gets upwards of 200-300 MB/s speeds with mechanical drives, and it has thunderbolt and USB 3. Only downside with it is that it requires a power brick to operate, lessening the mobile aspect of it. -- Sandman[.net]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-26 12:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vilain-3846E8.12174026122013@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #20207 |
In article <slrnlbobnp.ak9.mr@irc.sandman.net>, Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > In article <l9a9e0$ntv$1@reader1.panix.com>, Bread > <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote: > > > > Which I replied to with this: > > > > > > I want thunderbolt on the drive for my Macs with thunderbolt and USB 3/2 > > > for my iMac that doesn't have Thunderbolt. I have no need for eSata at > > > any > > > point :) > > > > I'm not sure you're getting it, then. Think of the eSata/Thunderbolt > > converter as *adding Thunderbolt to the drive* if you must. It's going > > to be as fast as the drive is capable of managing and certainly not a > > bottleneck. This gets you not just the fastest possible connection to > > the desktop, but also a lot more flexibility with additional desktop > > drives in the future. > > Yes, I understood that. Let's repeat what I'm looking for, to clear up any > confusion. > > I'm looking for a *mobile* hard drive, that is upwards of 1TB large, with > USB2/3 and thunderbolt connection on it. > > On this I would put my iPhoto library, and I would connect it to two Macs, > one that has only USB2 and one that has Thunderbolt. So it would be slow on > one Mac and quicker on the other. > > The product you linked to is a hub that would sit between my Mac and > whatever drive I would connect to it, it's a good product but would > counteract the entire "mobile" part of my needs, so to speak :) > > The Drobo Mini seems to be the best contender thus far. It has four drive > slots into which I could add four 256GB SSD disks, or even slower > mechanical drives. It gets upwards of 200-300 MB/s speeds with mechanical > drives, and it has thunderbolt and USB 3. Only downside with it is that > it requires a power brick to operate, lessening the mobile aspect of it. I still say you'll have to build this from parts. Buy a Thunderbird/USB3 enclosure and cable. Buy a 1TB SSD drive that will fit in said enclosure. It will probably be a full-height drive or you'll need to buy an adapter to plug it into the enclosure. Plug it in and see if it works. -- DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee... [I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.apps
csiph-web