Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #210298

Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?)

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On 6/23/19 8:40 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

>> Is it meaningful to test the SD cards with an USB-adapter? (the MicroSD
>> slot would be occupied by the SD card the machine is running from/on)
> Testing SD cards on a different controller may help understand
> _potential_  features of cards, but not_actual_  reachable potentials.
>
> If you prefer an analogy: Reading in a magazine that some Formel-1
> driver can cut a corner while driving 60km/h in same model car as yours
> does not mean that you can expect to cut that same corner at that speed:
> Depends not only on the vehicle (disk device) but also on the driver!


Sure. I have tried to drive the 4 cards along exactly the same path 
(i.e. flashbench) to reduce my influence on the performance. 
Unfortunately I cannot tell which one is the best from the resulting data.

If the fio benchmark can tell me which card is the best, I will try it 
at some point.

>
>
>>> Of those figures, I consider the random ones more important in most
>>> configurations. i.e. if I had to choose between a device that
>>> supported a bit higher sequential read/write but much lower random
>>> read/write, I'd rather have the random read/write, because that
>>> tends to have more impact on interactive usage than sequential.
>> Yes, going back and forth between Thunderbird and Firefox while
>> copying text snippets from one app to the other sometimes ends in a
>> mouse pointer freeze.
>>
>> That's basically what I do most of the time...
> Biggest speed gain (on a limited computer like Teres-I) is likely had
> with changing to less ressource hungry tools.
>
> Instead of Firefox try GNOME Web (apt install epiphany-browser).  It
> uses the rendering engine "Webkit" so is likely to handle most websites.
> For an radically lighter browser rendering fewer real-world websites
> properly and with an arguably less friendly user interface, try Surf.


This is very helpful. I have installed epiphany now. Thanks!

>
> A lighter alternative with ok UI and somewhat decent rendering engine is
> Netsurf, but unfortunately that one won't make it into Debian Buster.
>
> Instead of Thunderbird try Balsa or Claws Mail.


OK. Thanks!


>
>
>>> SD cards tend to have poor random IO speed so I would never use one
>>> for general purpose computing if I could use an HDD or SSD instead.
>> If random IO speed most likely is the real bottle neck, do you know of
>> any particular brand/label/kind/category of MicroSD card that is
>> significantly better than others in that regard?
> https://github.com/ThomasKaiser/Knowledge/blob/master/articles/A1_and_A2_rated_SD_cards.md
>
> (this is perhaps 5th time I share that link with you; 2nd on this list)
>

The article by Thomas Kaiser ends with an open discussion that you can 
probably just as well buy A1 cards made before 2017. The last card I 
bought is neither A1 or A2 but marked with a XC II logo. That particular 
markup is not mentioned in Kaiser's article.

So the article cannot tell me which of my 4 cards is likely to be the 
best for my usecase:

MicroSD SanDisk Extreme PRO  64GB  [3]  XC II
MicroSD SanDisk Extreme PLUS  64GB  [3]  XC I  V30  A2
MicroSD SanDisk Extreme PLUS  32GB  [3]  HC I  V30  A1
MicroSD SanDisk Ultra  32GB  [1]  HC I  (10)  A1


>> Not sure if chasing some microseconds of better performance will make
>> a difference, but if it is anything like parking with a heavy truck
>> with heavy trailer in a small parking lot with other cars, then I
>> guess a microsecond extra is just as important as an extra centimeter
>> :-)
>>
>>
>>> To give you some idea of what decent SSDs manage:
>>>
>>>       http://strugglers.net/~andy/blog/2019/05/29/linux-raid-10-may-not-always-be-the-best-performer-but-i-dont-know-why/
>>>
>> I don't think I can make Teres-I boot from an external SSD.
> Through the USB2 interface you can.  Won't reach the full potentials of
> SSD (see Formel-1 analogy above) but may still beat SD-cards.
>
> You cannot_boot_  via USB2 interface but you can store your data there
> which helps some scenarios (e.g. possibly helps Firefox hanging, as that
> might be due to its working on cache data below your $HOME.


Ahh.. there's another hint! For some applications, disk partition matters?

I hope there is no downside to having two browsers installed, as long as 
you don't use them at the same time!

Best regards.

//Erik

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the  (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-18 14:30 +0200
  Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2019-06-18 15:10 +0200
  Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-18 15:20 +0200
  Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2019-06-18 15:20 +0200
    Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-06-18 16:10 +0200
      Example of an M2 form factor SSD (was: Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-06-19 14:30 +0200
        Re: M2 form factor SSD Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2019-06-19 18:10 +0200
    Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-18 17:30 +0200
      Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-06-18 17:40 +0200
        Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2019-06-18 17:50 +0200
      Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2019-06-18 17:50 +0200
        Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-18 18:20 +0200
          Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-18 21:10 +0200
            Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-18 23:20 +0200
              Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2019-06-19 00:00 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-19 12:00 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-19 12:30 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-06-19 12:50 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-19 13:20 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-19 13:40 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-19 14:10 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-20 09:00 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-20 09:40 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2019-06-19 16:00 +0200
              Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2019-06-19 00:00 +0200
              Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-19 01:40 +0200
  Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de> - 2019-06-18 21:50 +0200
  Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2019-06-19 03:40 +0200
    Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-19 04:10 +0200
    Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-06-19 12:50 +0200
      Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2019-06-20 02:20 +0200
    Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-21 09:30 +0200
      Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-21 12:20 +0200
        Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-21 15:10 +0200
          Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2019-06-22 22:30 +0200
            Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-23 07:50 +0200
              Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-23 08:50 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-23 15:50 +0200
                Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2019-06-23 17:10 +0200
      Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can  the (Debian) setup make a difference?) David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2019-06-22 01:10 +0200
        Re: System on a chip - performance relative size and setup (how can the (Debian) setup make a difference?) Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> - 2019-06-22 11:50 +0200

csiph-web