Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.os.linux    |    Getting to be as bloated as Windows!    |    107,822 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 107,061 of 107,822    |
|    Paul to J.O. Aho    |
|    Re: Hard disk error (Error probing devic    |
|    07 Apr 25 15:00:29    |
      From: nospam@needed.invalid              On Mon, 4/7/2025 10:37 AM, J.O. Aho wrote:       > On 07/04/2025 14.07, Carlos E.R. wrote:       >> On 2025-04-07 11:42, Simon wrote:       >       >>> I found a fix to this some time ago, maybe it will help still now?       https://blog.simonj.eu/blog/jms578-based-adaptor-on-linux       >>       >> What does this do? The link doesn't explain.       >>       >> Google says that this changes usb-disk driver "UAS" to "usb-storage". Why       would I need that, what is the advantage?       >       > The UAS is a newer implementation for mass storage devices, this uses a SCSI       based protocol instead of the Bulk-Only Transport of the USB. Main benefit       with UAS is higher transfer speeds from/to usb connected mass storage units.       >       > As the device you use seems to have issues with UAS (at least the Linux       implementation), so the option seems to be to relay on the old USB       functionality and the benefit for you would be something that works.       >       > The following numbers based on tests on a Banana Pi:       > Seq Write: ~10% slower on USB vs UAS       > Seq Read: ~14% slower on USB vs UAS       >       >       > // Aho              For this particular device, the anecdotal evidence is the       regular USB storage seems to work, whereas the UAS implementation       had rough edges. The UAS supports TRIM, which would be a better       fit for SSDs, but I would not put SSDs in that enclosure.       A hard drive may survive any brutal treatment that firmware       hands out. We don't really know what that firmware       does to drives. If a firmware isn't remotely "compliant",       it remains a science experiment.              The next issue, is benching it for performance, and seeing       what kind of write rate it can manage. None of the chit-chat       about it I've seen so far, mentions a bench and whether the       internal processor limits it. It may be examining each ATA       command set command, as it goes by.               Paul              --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca