Author: Frank Altpeter <frank.altpeter AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:45:40 +0200
Hi, Sorry to warm up this slightly old discussion, but since I'm suffering from a similar problem, I just stumpled upon this thread while searching for a solution. In my setting, it's a disk-to-disk-
Author: Lukas Kolbe <l-lists AT einfachkaffee DOT de>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:56:31 +0200
Am Montag, den 21.06.2010, 01:20 +0200 schrieb Lukas Kolbe: Okay, I have to correct the 20MiB/sec figure for the tape drive. After I activated Data Spooling for the copy job, I installed sysstat and
Try separate raid arrays. FWIW I have 51245s here and their performance is _much_ better than that. Only the 6 disk raid6 array gets close to that and it's primarily spindle/headseek limited. -- Thin
Author: Lukas Kolbe <l-lists AT einfachkaffee DOT de>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:35:34 +0200
Am Montag, den 21.06.2010, 11:06 +0100 schrieb Alan Brown: I'll see when I can test with the spool on a different array. But the problem is not only when copying within the same array, I get the same
Author: John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:27:46 -0400
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Lukas Kolbe <l-lists AT einfachkaffee DOT de> wrote: Do you have a hardware raid controller without a BBunit and thus the write cache is disabled to protect corruptio
Author: Lukas Kolbe <l-lists AT einfachkaffee DOT de>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:45:41 +0200
Am Montag, den 21.06.2010, 11:27 -0400 schrieb John Drescher: We have a BBU and the write cache is enabled. Puzzling is that the now, and repeatedly, the same dd during the copy job works with 350MiB