wilson@ix1.cc.utexas.edu (Samuel M. Wilson) (01/06/91)
I have a Dell 310 (20Mhz 386, 32Kb cache) with a connor 105 Mb drive, and it seems the throughput to the drive might be slower than it should be. Coretst reports that track-track seeks are ~23Ms which is fine, but the tranfer rate is around 296 Kb/sec. Does that sound right? I am running I/O intensive programs and right now, I/O seems to be the real bottleneck. The drive seems slower than my Seagate RLL 277 to me. Sam Wilson -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Samuel M. Wilson wilson@ix1.cc.utexas.edu Department of Anthropology University of Texas, Austin
roeve@cip-s01.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Michael Roevenich) (01/07/91)
wilson@ix1.cc.utexas.edu (Samuel M. Wilson) writes: >I have a Dell 310 (20Mhz 386, 32Kb cache) with a connor 105 Mb drive, >and it seems the throughput to the drive might be slower than it should >be. Coretst reports that track-track seeks are ~23Ms which is fine, but >the tranfer rate is around 296 Kb/sec. Does that sound right? I am >running I/O intensive programs and right now, I/O seems to be the real >bottleneck. The drive seems slower than my Seagate RLL 277 to me. >Sam Wilson Hi Sam, Coretest is for the thrashcan if you use drives with built-in caches, as ESDI and SCSI-Drives. Try to measure using a simple stopwatch... you will be surprised. Gee, your disk is fast, isn't it... Greetings Michael Internet: roeve@rwthi3.informatik.rwth-aachen.de UUCP: ...unido!rwthi3!roeve FIDO: 2:242/42.1 (Michael Roevenich)