Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 05:46:16 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: "William A. Mahaffey III" <wam@hiwaay.net>, FreeBSD Questions !!!! <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: dd question Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1509270540450.40168@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <20150927131036.c6b2d9ce.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <5606A4FF.4090105@hiwaay.net> <CA%2BtpaK3UOEfKSfSjbdcH%2BR2jaU9=XVBEg%2B%2Bjn5VCbiiUkLF_Tg@mail.gmail.com> <56073915.6030707@hiwaay.net> <20150927131036.c6b2d9ce.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015, Polytropon wrote: > On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 19:37:51 -0453.75, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: >> Update: I tried the dd again w/ 'bs=1m' & it worked much faster: > > It's a more "native" block size suited for the devices in question. > 512 blocks aren't much common anymore. It's not really about the native block size of the device, but the overhead. Copying 1M with the default blocksize takes 2,048 transactions. Setting bs=1M does it in only one. It works the same with spinning disks, although the buffer does not need to be as large. Usually 64K or 128K is enough there. Incidently, the Handbook installation chapter does show the right way to install image files.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1509270540450.40168>