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. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
