From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 25 18:06:27 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6C1B16A4CE for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:06:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tierra2.ng.fadesa.es (tierra2.ng.fadesa.es [195.55.55.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E017F43D53 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:06:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from fandino@ng.fadesa.es) Received: from [195.55.55.163] ([195.55.55.163]) (authenticated bits=0) by tierra2.ng.fadesa.es (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9PI6P10018787 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:06:25 +0200 Message-ID: <417D40A1.9030802@ng.fadesa.es> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:06:25 +0200 From: fandino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616 X-Accept-Language: gl, en, es MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <14479.1098695558@critter.freebsd.dk> <417D25E8.6080804@ng.fadesa.es> <200410251928.01536.victor@alf.dyndns.ws> <200410251837.58257.Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com> <417D3F12.20302@DeepCore.dk> In-Reply-To: <417D3F12.20302@DeepCore.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Authenticated-Sender: user fandino from 195.55.55.163 X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version 0.75.1, clamav-milter version 0.75c on tierra2 X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3b7and poor ata performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: fandino@ng.fadesa.es List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:06:27 -0000 S=F8ren Schmidt wrote: >>> >>> please can you post how do you solved the problem? >> >> >> atacontrol mode DMA4 DMA4 >> atacontrol mode DMA4 DMA4 >> >> The reason is that the motherboard only supports ATA100 on two out of = >> four IDE channels and hence you need to force the two other channels=20 >> to run at DMA66=20 >=20 >=20 > How do you come to that conclusion ? There is no such limitation AFAIK.= >=20 > However you can only get a total sum of 133MB/s divided by number of=20 > disks (and minus some overhead on older system there is typically=20 > 110MB/s effective bandwidth).. >=20 > The real explanation is much more likely that the timing specs are=20 > marginal (overclocked ?) for the disks, which causes problems.. no, it is my home PC in which I work so it's important stability (not overclocking) and disk redundancy (vinum, gmirror) Also, there is an unresolvable question. Why two 52MB/s disks in raid0 has a throughput of 40MB/s and for raid1 18MB/s??