On 12/04/13 18:54, Per Jessen wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
On 2013-04-12 16:55 (GMT+1000) Basil Chupin composed:
Just to refresh the memories, I have an external USB3 HDD (a Seagate 2TB) which I split into 2 partitions: partition 1 formatted in ext4 and partition 2 formatted in ntfs. 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.
Look, I got all hot and bothered about this toing and froing about whether the front part of the HDD was formatted in whatever versus the backup being formatted in whatever (I have been reading the posts about the 1/3 part of an HDD being faster than the rest while someone else claimed that it is the 1/4 of the HDD which was the fastest while another claimed that it was all BS because the latest HDD don't do what the HDD did years ago, and so on and so forth, and dominus vobiscum etc.... So here is what I did. I took the 2TB external HDD and format the whole damn thing in (a) ntfs and then the whole damn thing in (b) ext4. I then used SystemRescueCD to copy the same file I mentioned in the earlier post (7,631,404,437 bytes) sitting on an *ntfs* formatted partition on an internal 1TB HDD to the external USB3 2TB HDD. With SystemRescueCD there was NO graphics involved. Copying the 7.6 GB file using mc (midnight commander) to the external HDD *all* of which was in ntfs, produced a result of ~27.4MB/s transfer rate. After I formatted the whole 2TB HDD in ext4, copying the same file using mc produced a transfer rate of ~79MB/s. In all these trials the same internal HDDs were used, the same USB3 cable was used, the same file(s) were copied using either the CLI command 'cp', or the app 'mc', and in the very latest trials (as in earlier today and tonight) using SystemRescue CD which does not use the openSUSE 12.2 or the 12.3 kernels and whatevers. The summary of all the results is that copying to an external USB3 device formatted in ntfs is 34% SLOWER than when copying the identical file to an ext4 formatted partition. Now, I am nowhere close to being an expert in any field, but trying to accept that copying a file to partition formatted in ntfs as against copying to an ext4 partition incurs an overhead of 34% is just a bit too much to accept gracefully. However, as I said, I am not an expert and will accept this (even though wikipedia doesn't support this difference in speeds). OK , taking all this into account, what can be wrong at *my* end, in my system, which could cause such a speed difference? BC -- Using openSUSE 12.3 x86_64 KDE 4.10.2 & kernel 3.8.6-2 on a system with- AMD FX 8-core 3.6/4.2GHz processor 16GB PC14900/1866MHz Quad Channel Corsair "Vengeance" RAM Gigabyte AMD3+ m/board; Gigabyte nVidia GTX550Ti 1GB DDR5 GPU -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org