Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: AHCI vs. IDE Modes With A SATA 3.0 SSD On Linux

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Most people don't have SSDs, so why not bench disks instead?
    Go back to the article and read the very first sentence.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by adiso View Post
    I use a CF-Card (its a SSD not only flash)in a IDE slot as a SSD does this mean I can not use trim because of IDE compatibly?
    I don't think any CF cards expose TRIM at all. The CF interface is the IDE interface, all the flash magic is inside the card.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,788

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Go back to the article and read the very first sentence.
    These weren't done by Phoronix. I can't just take anonymous benchmarks without any context seriously :-/

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    192

    Default

    As for CF devices...
    There are a few flash file systems like YAFFS and JFFS that will replicate some of what advance controllers like sandforce do for SATA SSD drives.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WorBlux View Post
    As for CF devices...
    There are a few flash file systems like YAFFS and JFFS that will replicate some of what advance controllers like sandforce do for SATA SSD drives.
    Yes, but you can only use those on raw flash*. CF just doesn't expose that.

    * Yes, mtd-block can be used to emulate. But that loses any and all advantages.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    That's more like it!

    One thing is clear with these tests: BlogBench isn't to be taken seriously. Unless someone can explain why IDE mode performs about 35% better with IDE mode on that test.

    What's the technical difference between IDE and AHCI modes when using SATA drives? Except for NCQ and hot-swap there must be other differences right? Shouldn't the maximum transfer rate be limited to 133MB/s if this was a real IDE mode?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Re: Why test with SSDs instead of HDs?
    Because back when you could still get the same disk in an IDE and SATA model, they usually did not even max the 133MB/sec IDE. Also, the actually delay of physically moving disk heads around dominated the benchmarks then.

    Re: Turning off swap. Do it. Linux does go to hell if your virtual memory (RAM+swap) runs out (and has since 1.0 kernel...), but with 8GB that is just not real likely. You've got like 6GB acting as a disk cache at that point which is sweet. If you ever DO need swap space for something or other (and no longer have a swap partition), a swap file is easy to make on the fly. You make an empty file with dd, you run mkswap on it, then run swapon on the swap file. swapoff -a when you are done and you can delete the swap if you wish. If you want it to be more permanent then put it in /etc/fstab.

    I was just gonna ask what the heck is up with BlogBench? If a device reads faster, writes faster, and seeks better with AHCI, then why would it be worse in one benchmark? My speculation is blog code tends to be bloated, AHCI lets more blog processes fire up at once then the box gets especially CPU bound (like with make -j, it's faster to run a sane number of copies of gcc than running like -j50.)

    Man though, those I/O speeds are amazing 8-).

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,788

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hwertz View Post
    Re: Turning off swap. Do it. Linux does go to hell if your virtual memory (RAM+swap) runs out (and has since 1.0 kernel...), but with 8GB that is just not real likely.
    Nope. Don't do it. Swap is not "more RAM on disk". This is quite an enlightening read:

    http://serverfault.com/a/332205

    And about the vm.swappiness sysctl parameter:

    http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2...365410#5365410

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •