Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Sequential disk write much slower than seq read (Online SC 2016 SATA)
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Sequential disk write much slower than seq read (Online SC 2016 SATA)

xyzxyz Member
edited March 2016 in Help

I got an Online.net SC 2016 SATA server with 500GB drive, but the sequential write speed is about half of the sequential read speed.

For all harddrives I've seen so far, the seq read/write speeds are typically about the same, so it seems really odd that I have this discrepancy. Does anyone have any clues as to what may be the cause?

I'm testing on an ext4 partition with journaling disabled, from recovery mode (so no other disk activity). Read speeds seem fine:

# hdparm -tT /dev/sda

/dev/sda:
 Timing cached reads:   3022 MB in  2.00 seconds = 1510.72 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads: 378 MB in  3.00 seconds = 125.83 MB/sec

However writes don't:

# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2M count=512 conv=fdatasync
512+0 records in
512+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 24.9087 s, 43.1 MB/s

Using FIO instead, I get 119MB/s seq read and 56MB/s seq write.
No issues reported by smartctl.

Is this a sign of a faulty disk, or a potential configuration error on my part?

For anyone else with the same server, what speeds are you getting?
david_W seems to be getting around 100MB/s and other benchmarks are giving similar seq read/write performance for the disk.

Online.net support are claiming that this is not unusual. Is this really the case?

I check in rescue and no problem with the disk, values seems OK with this kind of disk too
Values can differ between servers, but this is not abnormal values
Results can go from 50MB/s to 100MB/s, and the most often, between this 2 values

Edit: smartctl --all /dev/sda output:

smartctl 6.2 2013-07-26 r3841 [x86_64-linux-3.13.0-77-generic] (local build)
Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org

=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
Model Family:     Hitachi/HGST Travelstar Z7K500
Device Model:     HGST HTS725050A7E630
Serial Number:    RCF50ACE1S0G7M
LU WWN Device Id: 5 000cca 85ed88dc3
Firmware Version: GS2OA230
User Capacity:    500,107,862,016 bytes [500 GB]
Sector Sizes:     512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical
Rotation Rate:    7200 rpm
Device is:        In smartctl database [for details use: -P show]
ATA Version is:   ATA8-ACS T13/1699-D revision 6
SATA Version is:  SATA 2.6, 6.0 Gb/s (current: 3.0 Gb/s)
Local Time is:    Sun Mar 20 02:39:13 2016 CET
SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability.
SMART support is: Enabled

=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED

General SMART Values:
Offline data collection status:  (0x00) Offline data collection activity
                                        was never started.
                                        Auto Offline Data Collection: Disabled.
Self-test execution status:      (   0) The previous self-test routine completed
                                        without error or no self-test has ever
                                        been run.
Total time to complete Offline
data collection:                (   45) seconds.
Offline data collection
capabilities:                    (0x5b) SMART execute Offline immediate.
                                        Auto Offline data collection on/off support.
                                        Suspend Offline collection upon new
                                        command.
                                        Offline surface scan supported.
                                        Self-test supported.
                                        No Conveyance Self-test supported.
                                        Selective Self-test supported.
SMART capabilities:            (0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering
                                        power-saving mode.
                                        Supports SMART auto save timer.
Error logging capability:        (0x01) Error logging supported.
                                        General Purpose Logging supported.
Short self-test routine
recommended polling time:        (   2) minutes.
Extended self-test routine
recommended polling time:        (  90) minutes.
SCT capabilities:              (0x003d) SCT Status supported.
                                        SCT Error Recovery Control supported.
                                        SCT Feature Control supported.
                                        SCT Data Table supported.

SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE      UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate     0x000b   100   100   062    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
  2 Throughput_Performance  0x0005   100   100   040    Pre-fail  Offline      -       0
  3 Spin_Up_Time            0x0007   100   100   033    Pre-fail  Always       -       1
  4 Start_Stop_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       7
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   005    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
  7 Seek_Error_Rate         0x000b   100   100   067    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
  8 Seek_Time_Performance   0x0005   100   100   040    Pre-fail  Offline      -       0
  9 Power_On_Hours          0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       205
 10 Spin_Retry_Count        0x0013   100   100   060    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
 12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       4
191 G-Sense_Error_Rate      0x000a   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       2
193 Load_Cycle_Count        0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       15
194 Temperature_Celsius     0x0002   214   214   000    Old_age   Always       -       28 (Min/Max 17/34)
196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
197 Current_Pending_Sector  0x0022   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable   0x0008   100   100   000    Old_age   Offline      -       0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count    0x000a   200   200   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
223 Load_Retry_Count        0x000a   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0

SMART Error Log Version: 1
No Errors Logged

SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
Num  Test_Description    Status                  Remaining  LifeTime(hours)  LBA_of_first_error
# 1  Short offline       Completed without error       00%       147         -

SMART Selective self-test log data structure revision number 1
 SPAN  MIN_LBA  MAX_LBA  CURRENT_TEST_STATUS
    1        0        0  Not_testing
    2        0        0  Not_testing
    3        0        0  Not_testing
    4        0        0  Not_testing
    5        0        0  Not_testing
Selective self-test flags (0x0):
  After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk.
If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute delay.

FIO output:

Seq-Read: (g=0): rw=read, bs=1M-1M/1M-1M/1M-1M, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=1
Seq-Write: (g=1): rw=write, bs=1M-1M/1M-1M/1M-1M, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=1
fio-2.1.3
Starting 2 processes
Seq-Read: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 1024MB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [RP] [4.8% done] [120.9MB/0KB/0KB /s] [120/0/0 iops] [eta 01m:00sJobs: 1 (f=1): [RP] [6.2% done] [120.9MB/0KB/0KB /s] [120/0/0 iops] [eta 01m:00sJobs: 1 (f=1): [RP] [7.7% done] [120.9MB/0KB/0KB /s] [120/0/0 iops] [eta 01m:00sJobs: 1 (f=1): [RP] [9.1% done] [120.9MB/0KB/0KB /s] [120/0/0 iops] [eta 01m:00sJobs: 1 (f=1): [RP] [10.4% done] [119.1MB/0KB/0KB /s] [119/0/0 iops] [eta 01m:00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [RP] [11.8% done] [120.9MB/0KB/0KB /s] [120/0/0 iops] [eta 01m:00Jobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [11.8% done] [91044KB/1022KB/0KB /s] [88/0/0 iops] [eta 01m:Jobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [20.0% done] [0KB/48079KB/0KB /s] [0/46/0 iops] [eta 00m:40sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [31.4% done] [0KB/64447KB/0KB /s] [0/62/0 iops] [eta 00m:24sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [37.5% done] [0KB/59332KB/0KB /s] [0/57/0 iops] [eta 00m:20sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [43.3% done] [0KB/56263KB/0KB /s] [0/54/0 iops] [eta 00m:17sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [46.7% done] [0KB/54217KB/0KB /s] [0/52/0 iops] [eta 00m:16sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [51.7% done] [0KB/50125KB/0KB /s] [0/48/0 iops] [eta 00m:14sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [55.2% done] [0KB/51148KB/0KB /s] [0/49/0 iops] [eta 00m:13sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [58.6% done] [0KB/57286KB/0KB /s] [0/55/0 iops] [eta 00m:12sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [64.3% done] [0KB/59332KB/0KB /s] [0/57/0 iops] [eta 00m:10sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [67.9% done] [0KB/61378KB/0KB /s] [0/59/0 iops] [eta 00m:09sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [71.4% done] [0KB/55240KB/0KB /s] [0/53/0 iops] [eta 00m:08sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [75.0% done] [0KB/54217KB/0KB /s] [0/52/0 iops] [eta 00m:07sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [81.5% done] [0KB/61378KB/0KB /s] [0/59/0 iops] [eta 00m:05sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [85.2% done] [0KB/55240KB/0KB /s] [0/53/0 iops] [eta 00m:04sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [88.9% done] [0KB/62401KB/0KB /s] [0/60/0 iops] [eta 00m:03sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [92.6% done] [0KB/60355KB/0KB /s] [0/58/0 iops] [eta 00m:02sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [96.3% done] [0KB/55240KB/0KB /s] [0/53/0 iops] [eta 00m:01sJobs: 1 (f=1): [_W] [100.0% done] [0KB/42965KB/0KB /s] [0/41/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
Seq-Read: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2474: Sun Mar 20 02:48:35 2016
  read : io=1024.0MB, bw=122554KB/s, iops=119, runt=  8556msec
    slat (usec): min=92, max=746, avg=94.72, stdev=20.57
    clat (msec): min=6, max=56, avg= 8.26, stdev= 1.74
     lat (msec): min=6, max=57, avg= 8.35, stdev= 1.76
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[ 6752],  5.00th=[ 6816], 10.00th=[ 6816], 20.00th=[ 8384],
     | 30.00th=[ 8384], 40.00th=[ 8512], 50.00th=[ 8512], 60.00th=[ 8512],
     | 70.00th=[ 8512], 80.00th=[ 8512], 90.00th=[ 8512], 95.00th=[ 8512],
     | 99.00th=[ 8512], 99.50th=[ 9664], 99.90th=[25216], 99.95th=[57088],
     | 99.99th=[57088]
    bw (KB  /s): min=111304, max=124430, per=100.00%, avg=122630.56, stdev=3282.11
    lat (msec) : 10=99.71%, 20=0.10%, 50=0.10%, 100=0.10%
  cpu          : usr=0.08%, sys=1.32%, ctx=1027, majf=0, minf=283
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued    : total=r=1024/w=0/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
Seq-Write: (groupid=1, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2475: Sun Mar 20 02:48:35 2016
  write: io=1024.0MB, bw=55814KB/s, iops=54, runt= 18787msec
    slat (usec): min=118, max=230, avg=168.67, stdev=18.20
    clat (msec): min=3, max=69, avg=18.17, stdev=12.78
     lat (msec): min=4, max=70, avg=18.34, stdev=12.78
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[ 3952],  5.00th=[ 3952], 10.00th=[ 3952], 20.00th=[ 3952],
     | 30.00th=[ 3952], 40.00th=[18048], 50.00th=[18048], 60.00th=[18304],
     | 70.00th=[19840], 80.00th=[27520], 90.00th=[35584], 95.00th=[43264],
     | 99.00th=[52480], 99.50th=[53504], 99.90th=[61696], 99.95th=[70144],
     | 99.99th=[70144]
    bw (KB  /s): min=40715, max=65145, per=100.00%, avg=55882.17, stdev=6620.89
    lat (msec) : 4=33.30%, 10=0.10%, 20=38.67%, 50=26.27%, 100=1.66%
  cpu          : usr=0.48%, sys=0.59%, ctx=1032, majf=0, minf=26
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued    : total=r=0/w=1024/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=122554KB/s, minb=122554KB/s, maxb=122554KB/s, mint=8556msec, maxt=8556msec

Run status group 1 (all jobs):
  WRITE: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=55813KB/s, minb=55813KB/s, maxb=55813KB/s, mint=18787msec, maxt=18787msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  sda: ios=2048/2048, merge=0/0, ticks=12680/28036, in_queue=40704, util=98.09%
«1

Comments

  • IshaqIshaq Member

    Looks like a fairly new disk, wonder why there are so many pre-fails.

  • xyzxyz Member

    Ishaq said: why there are so many pre-fails.

    Where'd you see the pre-fails?

  • How about a larger block size with dd ?

  • xyzxyz Member

    What size do you recommend?

    2MB blocks are fairly large and I've never really seen benchmarks that go beyond that. I can't imagine much of a difference though, as you get rapidly diminishing returns the higher you go.

  • I use bs=2G count=1 when testing manually ...... Way much too high I guess

  • Looks like some sort of power saving on the HDD, first time testing is similar to your result.

    [root@*** ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=./testfile bs=2G count=1 oflag=direct && rm -f testfile
    0+1 records in
    0+1 records out
    2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 33.583 s, 63.9 MB/s
    [root@*** ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=./testfile bs=2G count=1 oflag=direct && rm -f testfile
    0+1 records in
    0+1 records out
    2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 20.374 s, 105 MB/s
    [root@*** ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=./testfile bs=2G count=1 oflag=direct && rm -f testfile
    0+1 records in
    0+1 records out
    2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 22.2073 s, 96.7 MB/s
    [root@*** ~]# 
    
    

  • edited March 2016

    What's the output of

    hdparm -B /dev/sda
    hdparm -C /dev/sda
    

    Side Note: May have to wait a while without disk activity to run hdparm -C just to make sure that things are spinning down if they actually are.

  • xyzxyz Member
    edited March 2016

    Tried your test but doesn't seem to make a difference :(

    # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2G count=1 oflag=direct && rm -f test; \
      dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2G count=1 oflag=direct && rm -f test; \
      dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2G count=1 oflag=direct && rm -f test
    0+1 records in
    0+1 records out
    2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 49.6375 s, 43.3 MB/s
    0+1 records in
    0+1 records out
    2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 48.635 s, 44.2 MB/s
    0+1 records in
    0+1 records out
    2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 45.6127 s, 47.1 MB/s
    

    ...well, I suppose the speed is increasing slightly, gradually... May be due to random chance.

    APM was set to 254 (max performance) anyway, so I assume that power saving shouldn't be coming into play anyway:

    # hdparm -i /dev/sda
    
    /dev/sda:
    
     Model=HGST HTS725050A7E630, FwRev=GS2OA230, SerialNo=RCF50ACE1S0G7M
     Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
     RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=4
     BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=unknown, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
     CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=976773168
     IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
     PIO modes:  pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
     DMA modes:  mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
     UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 udma5 *udma6
     AdvancedPM=yes: mode=0xFE (254) WriteCache=enabled
     Drive conforms to: unknown:  ATA/ATAPI-2,3,4,5,6,7
    
     * signifies the current active mode
    

    Online.net support keeps insisting that my speeds are acceptable, and won't do anything about it. Even looking across 1.8k disks of the same model, the minimum speed (68.3MB/s) is still a fair bit better than the best I can achieve (which is MUCH slower than the average of 101MB/s).

    Apparently refunds aren't available after an install has been performed - seems quite reasonable, but they don't give the option to boot into recovery before installation. Which means that it's impossible to check disk speed until after you install an OS.


    ALinuxNinja said: What's the output of

    # hdparm -B /dev/sda
    
    /dev/sda:
     APM_level      = 254
    
    # hdparm -C /dev/sda
    
    /dev/sda:
     drive state is:  active/idle
    

    Thanks for the responses!

  • I am using CentOS7 BTW.. not sure if that's something you can try it out.

    Does dmesg showing any IO errors?

  • @Ishaq said:
    Looks like a fairly new disk, wonder why there are so many pre-fails.

    Pre_fail is a label for the type of indicator, not a value/result. The chance of imminent failure is determined by increasing values in pre_fail rows, the label will always say pre_fail/old_age.

    So, SMART-wise this drive seems fine, even if performance is iffy.

    Thanked by 1rm_
  • xyzxyz Member

    Debian 8 here, but have tried with the Ubuntu 14.04 recovery disk. Online don't offer a CentOS recovery disk. I honestly doubt it makes any difference.

    I can't see any errors in dmesg at all, but if there's anything I should grep, I can do that.

  • Honestly, if your disk has data (ie you're not write testing right on the edge) I think that 43MB/sec is normal for raw write speed of what I assume is a 2.5" drive. It's pretty much exactly the speed I've seen from WD black 2.5" drives.

  • xyzxyz Member

    Good point - didn't think of that!
    It has data, but not a lot, so shouldn't be writing on the (center?) edge.

    But we can try testing that too I suppose. My first partition is a 200MB /boot partition, which I presume is closest to the outer rim of the disk (and hence the fastest part of the drive).

    I've wiped this partition, with the following:

    # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda1 bs=2M oflag=direct
    dd: error writing ‘/dev/sda1’: No space left on device
    96+0 records in
    95+0 records out
    199229440 bytes (199 MB) copied, 3.95388 s, 50.4 MB/s
    # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda1 bs=2M oflag=direct
    dd: error writing ‘/dev/sda1’: No space left on device
    96+0 records in
    95+0 records out
    199229440 bytes (199 MB) copied, 4.11402 s, 48.4 MB/s
    

    I presume this should be about the fastest I can get out of this disk?

  • rm_rm_ IPv6 Advocate, Veteran

    Sector Sizes: 512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical

    @xyz is the partition 4K-aligned? It needs to be (and just in case it's better align to 1MB or so). Show the output of sfdisk -d /dev/sda

  • xyzxyz Member

    All aligned to 1MB:

    # partition table of /dev/sda
    unit: sectors
    
    /dev/sda1 : start=     2048, size=   389120, Id=83, bootable
    /dev/sda2 : start=   391168, size=160000000, Id=83
    /dev/sda3 : start=160391168, size=   999424, Id=82
    /dev/sda4 : start=161390592, size=815380480, Id=83
    
  • IshaqIshaq Member

    @tehdan said:
    So, SMART-wise this drive seems fine, even if performance is iffy.

    I thought as much because my dedis are outputting the same results. Thanks for the explanation.

  • SpacedustSpacedust Member
    edited March 2016

    Here's mine Dedibox XC SSD 2015 with Samsung SSD PM871 128GB at SATA3:

    /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 3446 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1723.40 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 1332 MB in 3.00 seconds = 443.38 MB/sec

    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2M count=512 conv=fdatasync 512+0 records in 512+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 9.2816 s, 116 MB/s

  • SpacedustSpacedust Member
    edited March 2016

    Another XC SSD 2015 with Intel 320 series SSD 120 GB at SATA2:

    /dev/sda:
    Timing cached reads:   3612 MB in  2.00 seconds = 1806.29 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 768 MB in  3.00 seconds = 255.79 MB/sec
    
    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2M count=512 conv=fdatasync
    512+0 records in
    512+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 9.224 s, 116 MB/s
    
  • SpacedustSpacedust Member
    edited March 2016

    And now XC SSD 2016 with Samsung SSD PM871 256GB at SATA2:

    /dev/sda:
     Timing cached reads:   3816 MB in  2.00 seconds = 1908.26 MB/sec
     Timing buffered disk reads: 802 MB in  3.00 seconds = 267.06 MB/sec
    
    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2M count=512 conv=fdatasync
    512+0 records in
    512+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 4.62933 s, 232 MB/s
    
  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider

    @Spacedust said:
    And now XC SSD 2016 with Samsung SSD PM871 256GB at SATA2:

    /dev/sda:
    Timing cached reads: 3816 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1908.26 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 802 MB in 3.00 seconds = 267.06 MB/sec

    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2M count=512 conv=fdatasync
    512+0 records in
    512+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 4.62933 s, 232 MB/s
    @Spacedust said:
    And now XC SSD 2016 with Samsung SSD PM871 256GB at SATA2:

    /dev/sda:
    Timing cached reads: 3816 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1908.26 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 802 MB in 3.00 seconds = 267.06 MB/sec

    dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=2M count=512 conv=fdatasync
    512+0 records in
    512+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 4.62933 s, 232 MB/s

    How does that help the OP? OP has a standard magnetic drive, not an SSD.

    Thanked by 1netomx
  • AmitzAmitz Member
    edited March 2016

    @Clouvider: Don't mind Spacedust. He is just very, very excited with his new online.net servers and tends to be a bit compulsive when posting... ;-)

    Thanked by 3netomx rm_ Clouvider
  • SpacedustSpacedust Member
    edited March 2016

    You won't get more with laptop HDD's. SATA3 won't help at all as these drives will never reach 267 MB/s.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • xyzxyz Member

    Thanks again for all the replies, from the looks of things, this issue probably isn't due to a configuration fault on my side.

    I've managed to convince Online.net support that there's a problem - they're looking into a BIOS update which may fix the issue. Fingers crossed here, but a heads up to anyone else who happens to be in the same boat (is there anyone else here? haven't heard from them if so!).

  • They should update the BIOS to take advantage of SATA3.

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider

    @Spacedust said:
    They should update the BIOS to take advantage of SATA3.

    Huh?

  • @Spacedust said:
    They should update the BIOS to take advantage of SATA3.

    Agreed.

  • @Spacedust / @david_W -

    How on earth will this help when accessing a single 2.5" drive? I doubt you can even fill its cache at SATA3 speeds. 40-50MB/sec is pretty average write performance for a spinning laptop hard drive.

    Thanked by 1Clouvider
  • @tehdan said:
    Spacedust / david_W -

    How on earth will this help when accessing a single 2.5" drive? I doubt you can even fill its cache at SATA3 speeds. 40-50MB/sec is pretty average write performance for a spinning laptop hard drive.

    Well, at least, it will make me feel good........

  • @david_W it should make you feel stupid.

  • @tehdan said:
    david_W it should make you feel stupid.

    People wants everything with a 8.99 box lol. I don't even mind if they are willing to put ECC RAM on it.

Sign In or Register to comment.