On Wednesday 03 March 2010, Mikkel wrote:
On 03/03/2010 06:58 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> As usual, Craig White cannot ever be wrong. I had a wife like that, 25
> years ago. When she left, I bought a 6 pack to celebrate. My penance in
> hell was over.
>
> But I will state this real simply as a question: This machine, a slow
> 2.1Ghz quad core phenom, with 4GB of dram, after rsync'ing the F10 32 bit
> install from a DD configured drive, to one I configured, has remained
> much faster than the DD configured install ever managed. Using ccache,
> 12 to 14 minute kernel compiles are now in the 3 to 5 minute range as one
> example.
>
> So I ask, what miss-configuration that DD was in charge of on the
> original install, could slow a machine down that badly?
>
> Seems like a good enough question to deserve a factual answer.
I had a setup behaved like that. The difference was caused by moving
the SATA drive from one system to another. The second system
supported 3.0 Gbps and the first one only supported 1.5 Gbps. I have
also seen it when someone had installed the jumper that limited the
drive to 1.5 Gbps.
Mikkel
In this case, same motherboard, same sata0 connector. This board has 6 or 7
sata ports. 4 in use ATM.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Pause for storage relocation.