<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Howto: Set up Edgy for speed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/</link>
	<description>K.Mandla's blog of Linux experiences</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:19:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: I think they&#8217;re all gone &#171; Motho ke motho ka botho</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-41225</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[I think they&#8217;re all gone &#171; Motho ke motho ka botho]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 13:27:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-41225</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] used blockquote tags to set off statistics or numbers. This time I polished up things like the dusty old speed tips for Edgy, or some extremely early speed tests of Windows 2000 against [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] used blockquote tags to set off statistics or numbers. This time I polished up things like the dusty old speed tips for Edgy, or some extremely early speed tests of Windows 2000 against [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sindhudweep Sarkar</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-38106</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sindhudweep Sarkar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:06:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-38106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Jared!

If the disk is constant angular velocity (ie there is no shear between the inside and outside of the disk) then all portions of the platter go through the same amount of revolutions.

In the case of a 5400 rpm drive, every particle on the plater rotates about the axis 10800pi radians every minute.

The linear speed varies in a constant angular drive, so ideally you&#039;d want the swap to be on the outside so it&#039;s real fast. You might also want to have the /boot on the outside too.

One needs to be careful however, since sectors are indexed starting from the outside on constant angular velocity drives. Sector 0 /is/ the outside of the disk. This is different than constant linear velocity drives like cds and dvds where the first sector is actually on the inside of the disk. I hope that helps.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jared!</p>
<p>If the disk is constant angular velocity (ie there is no shear between the inside and outside of the disk) then all portions of the platter go through the same amount of revolutions.</p>
<p>In the case of a 5400 rpm drive, every particle on the plater rotates about the axis 10800pi radians every minute.</p>
<p>The linear speed varies in a constant angular drive, so ideally you&#8217;d want the swap to be on the outside so it&#8217;s real fast. You might also want to have the /boot on the outside too.</p>
<p>One needs to be careful however, since sectors are indexed starting from the outside on constant angular velocity drives. Sector 0 /is/ the outside of the disk. This is different than constant linear velocity drives like cds and dvds where the first sector is actually on the inside of the disk. I hope that helps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Set up Ubuntu for speed &#171; Motho ke motho ka botho</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-37502</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Set up Ubuntu for speed &#171; Motho ke motho ka botho]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 23:39:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-37502</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] two years to be exact, I converted a trampled, worn-out forum thread about Ubuntu speed into a blog post about improving boot times and overall performance in [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] two years to be exact, I converted a trampled, worn-out forum thread about Ubuntu speed into a blog post about improving boot times and overall performance in [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jared</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-36164</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jared]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 04:16:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-36164</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;You can pickup a little speed boast by making the the swap partition the last partition on the hard drive. This area of the hard drive has the highest read/write speed. This will likely vary from drive to drive. Best is a seperate drive for swap, last partition, and on the fastest drive.&quot;

Isn&#039;t it the other way around?  The disk is round so the center turns faster.  You&#039;d want swap at the begining or center of the hard disk.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;You can pickup a little speed boast by making the the swap partition the last partition on the hard drive. This area of the hard drive has the highest read/write speed. This will likely vary from drive to drive. Best is a seperate drive for swap, last partition, and on the fastest drive.&#8221;</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t it the other way around?  The disk is round so the center turns faster.  You&#8217;d want swap at the begining or center of the hard disk.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tips untuk mengoptimalkan filesystem ext3 Linux &#171; Happydad&#8217;s Weblog</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-35247</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tips untuk mengoptimalkan filesystem ext3 Linux &#171; Happydad&#8217;s Weblog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:20:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-35247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] HOWTO: Set up Edgy for speed  [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] HOWTO: Set up Edgy for speed  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K.Mandla</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-17878</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[K.Mandla]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 23:11:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-17878</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Chris! Thanks for the tips!

I was looking into nodiratime, and it looks like if you flag ext2/3(/4?) with noatime, you automatically get nodiratime too. I&#039;m going by the discussion here, where the source code seems to show as much.

http://lwn.net/Articles/244829/

From my own experimenting, my boot and access times are almost identical with noatime, and then with noatime and nodiratime. But it&#039;s useful nonetheless. 

I&#039;m still looking at the other two tweaks, since I don&#039;t have an ext3 partition built right now. Thanks again! ;)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Chris! Thanks for the tips!</p>
<p>I was looking into nodiratime, and it looks like if you flag ext2/3(/4?) with noatime, you automatically get nodiratime too. I&#8217;m going by the discussion here, where the source code seems to show as much.</p>
<p><a href="http://lwn.net/Articles/244829/" rel="nofollow">http://lwn.net/Articles/244829/</a></p>
<p>From my own experimenting, my boot and access times are almost identical with noatime, and then with noatime and nodiratime. But it&#8217;s useful nonetheless. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m still looking at the other two tweaks, since I don&#8217;t have an ext3 partition built right now. Thanks again! <img src='http://s1.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-17865</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-17865</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi!

Thanks for this great Howto and summarising all these tweaks. Did you know, that beside the &quot;noatime&quot;-Option, there&#039;s also &quot;nodiratime&quot; and further more &quot;nobh&quot; for ext2/3/4-filesystems.

&quot;noatime&quot; disables, that every last access time for files is stored, and &quot;nodiratime&quot; does that for directories, as far as I know. For non-Server or home-use-system there are, imho, no disadvantages only improvements, when using this options.

&quot;nobh&quot; (also for /etc/fstab) I found in the kernel documentation, it says:
(found in /(kernel)/Documentation/filesystems/ext3.txt)

&quot;bh		(*)	ext3 associates buffer heads to data pages to

nobh			(a) cache disk block mapping information
			(b) link pages into transaction to provide
			    ordering guarantees.
			&quot;bh&quot; option forces use of buffer heads.
			&quot;nobh&quot; option tries to avoid associating buffer
			heads (supported only for &quot;writeback&quot; mode).
&quot;

I guess it means some improvement when using data=writeback.

By the way, I read that ext2 is thus old much faster than ext3, because of no journal function. So maybe it&#039;s a good idead, to make e.g. /tmp as an extra ext2-partition. (directories with non-important data)

Also excited about ext4dev with its &quot;extents&quot; feature. :-)


One last thing I found:
For ext3/ext4dev there&#039;s the &quot;commit=(seconds)&quot; option. In default it&#039;s 5 seconds (commit=5), you can change that to commit=100 e.g. It&#039;s not good for unstable systems, because with a crash, you maybe have more data loss. But I thingk it improves performance. There&#039;s also a paragragh in the ext3-Kernel-documentation.


Thanks again for this howto! I guess you can add safely the &quot;nodiratime&quot; option. Have a look at the other options.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi!</p>
<p>Thanks for this great Howto and summarising all these tweaks. Did you know, that beside the &#8220;noatime&#8221;-Option, there&#8217;s also &#8220;nodiratime&#8221; and further more &#8220;nobh&#8221; for ext2/3/4-filesystems.</p>
<p>&#8220;noatime&#8221; disables, that every last access time for files is stored, and &#8220;nodiratime&#8221; does that for directories, as far as I know. For non-Server or home-use-system there are, imho, no disadvantages only improvements, when using this options.</p>
<p>&#8220;nobh&#8221; (also for /etc/fstab) I found in the kernel documentation, it says:<br />
(found in /(kernel)/Documentation/filesystems/ext3.txt)</p>
<p>&#8220;bh		(*)	ext3 associates buffer heads to data pages to</p>
<p>nobh			(a) cache disk block mapping information<br />
			(b) link pages into transaction to provide<br />
			    ordering guarantees.<br />
			&#8220;bh&#8221; option forces use of buffer heads.<br />
			&#8220;nobh&#8221; option tries to avoid associating buffer<br />
			heads (supported only for &#8220;writeback&#8221; mode).<br />
&#8221;</p>
<p>I guess it means some improvement when using data=writeback.</p>
<p>By the way, I read that ext2 is thus old much faster than ext3, because of no journal function. So maybe it&#8217;s a good idead, to make e.g. /tmp as an extra ext2-partition. (directories with non-important data)</p>
<p>Also excited about ext4dev with its &#8220;extents&#8221; feature. <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>One last thing I found:<br />
For ext3/ext4dev there&#8217;s the &#8220;commit=(seconds)&#8221; option. In default it&#8217;s 5 seconds (commit=5), you can change that to commit=100 e.g. It&#8217;s not good for unstable systems, because with a crash, you maybe have more data loss. But I thingk it improves performance. There&#8217;s also a paragragh in the ext3-Kernel-documentation.</p>
<p>Thanks again for this howto! I guess you can add safely the &#8220;nodiratime&#8221; option. Have a look at the other options.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Velocizzare kubuntu&#8230;da adesso si può! &#171; davilinux</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-13128</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Velocizzare kubuntu&#8230;da adesso si può! &#171; davilinux]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-13128</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/ [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] <a href="http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/" rel="nofollow">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ice</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-2909</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ice]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:19:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-2909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I got it, some restarts later. Don&#039;t know how, but the last big filetransfers worked very fine. The windows taskmanager on the server even showed a networkload of 66% for some time, mostly 50%. This on an 100 MBit Ethernet network.
tcpdump allways shows the link-type EN10MB.
Which tool would be best to test a network?
Thanks to K.Mandla and Sindhudweep Sarkar for their help!
Again: Very good work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I got it, some restarts later. Don&#8217;t know how, but the last big filetransfers worked very fine. The windows taskmanager on the server even showed a networkload of 66% for some time, mostly 50%. This on an 100 MBit Ethernet network.<br />
tcpdump allways shows the link-type EN10MB.<br />
Which tool would be best to test a network?<br />
Thanks to K.Mandla and Sindhudweep Sarkar for their help!<br />
Again: Very good work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ice</title>
		<link>http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-2183</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ice]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2007 09:25:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2006/11/11/howto-set-up-edgy-for-speed/#comment-2183</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@K.Mandala: The network is the build-in thing from my Dell Latitide C600 Notebook. It runs under windows with 100MBit but under ubuntu it isn&#039;t that fast. No idea how to benchmark that but copy of large files from / to my (win2003-) servers shows the lack of performance.

@Sindhudweep Sarkar: I know very well how to calculate it.

I don&#039;t know how to understand the output of tcpdump: it writes as an intro something like &#039;link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)&#039;. Shouldn&#039;t it be EN100MB or am i wrong?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@K.Mandala: The network is the build-in thing from my Dell Latitide C600 Notebook. It runs under windows with 100MBit but under ubuntu it isn&#8217;t that fast. No idea how to benchmark that but copy of large files from / to my (win2003-) servers shows the lack of performance.</p>
<p>@Sindhudweep Sarkar: I know very well how to calculate it.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know how to understand the output of tcpdump: it writes as an intro something like &#8216;link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)&#8217;. Shouldn&#8217;t it be EN100MB or am i wrong?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
