On 2013-04-12 10:54 (GMT+0200) Per Jessen composed:
Felix Miata wrote:
Presumably, each is about half the entire HD? If so, and #1 is at the front of the HD and #2 brings up the rear, then you can expect #2 to be slower even if using the same filesystem type as #1.
Yes, I saw this too a while ago when I was testing some 3Tb drives. I don't think the differences were as significant as what Basil's been seeing though.
Looks like you couldn't be bothered to open the link I provided to see what to most would be a significant difference, so I have to paste relevant excerpts from it: Disk I/O disk 0-1: Track 0 xfer rate fwd : 74.301 Megabytes/second Middle trk rate fwds. : 61.215 Megabytes/second Last track rate bwds. : 35.128 Megabytes/second Disk I/O disk 1-2: Track 0 xfer rate fwd : 60.338 Megabytes/second Middle trk rate fwds. : 49.043 Megabytes/second Last track rate bwds. : 34.297 Megabytes/second Those number are from drives 5+ years old. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org