Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Brad Tilley
Date: Thursday, December 31, 2009 - 12:08 pm

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:57 +0100, "Tomas Bodzar" <tomas.bodzar@gmail.com> wrote:


My earlier suggestion of bs=4m is probably way too large. After 64k, it doesn't get much faster... at least on my USB drives:

# time dd if=/dev/rsd1c of=/dev/null bs=64k 
3859+1 records in
3859+1 records out
252968448 bytes transferred in 23.163 secs (10920945 bytes/sec)
    0m23.16s real     0m0.00s user     0m0.00s system
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
testing a drive with dd -- odd results, Scott McEachern, (Thu Dec 31, 7:03 am)
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results, Matthew Szudzik, (Thu Dec 31, 8:34 am)
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results, Brad Tilley, (Thu Dec 31, 8:58 am)
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results, Marco Peereboom, (Thu Dec 31, 9:08 am)
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results, Tomas Bodzar, (Thu Dec 31, 11:57 am)
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results, Brad Tilley, (Thu Dec 31, 12:08 pm)
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results, David Gwynne, (Fri Jan 1, 12:19 am)
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results, Marco Peereboom, (Fri Jan 1, 7:39 am)
Further testing a drive with dd running -current, Scott McEachern, (Sat Jan 2, 11:50 am)
Re: Further testing a drive with dd running -current, David Vasek, (Sat Jan 2, 3:02 pm)
Re: Further testing a drive with dd running -current, Scott McEachern, (Sat Jan 2, 3:43 pm)
Re: Further testing a drive with dd running -current, David Vasek, (Sun Jan 3, 2:22 am)