On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 00:08 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > Craig White wrote: > >>> great thanks - am I right in thinking that having both mirrored drives > >>> on the same controller master/slave is likely a cause of slowness? > >> It will make some difference on writes, but reads should only > >> be done on one of the drives anyway. I doubt if it makes a huge > >> difference unless you have an application writing all the time. > > ---- > > here's my problem - system was ok and mother board died. Purchased a new > > motherboard and this is what I get... > > > > # hdparm -t /dev/md1 > > > > /dev/md1: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 4 MB in 3.68 seconds = 1.09 MB/sec > > > > which is dreadfully slow > > That's worse than slow. Something is broken. Do the drives perform > better if you test /dev/hda or /dev/hdb? ---- no # hdparm -t /dev/hda6 /dev/hda6: Timing buffered disk reads: 4 MB in 3.63 seconds = 1.10 MB/sec [root at spot root]# hdparm -t /dev/hdb6 /dev/hdb6: Timing buffered disk reads: 4 MB in 3.60 seconds = 1.11 MB/sec ---- > What does dmesg say > about them - does it mention UDMA(100) or better? Are you using > a new-style 80-wire cable? It might be worth buying an IDE > controller card if the on-board one won't do better than that. ---- dmesg states nothing about ATA 100... Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver Revision: 7.00beta4-2.4 ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with idebus=xx hda: WDC WD800JB-00JJA0, ATA DISK drive hdb: HDS728080PLAT20, ATA DISK drive I'm going over there tomorrow and I will surely bring a new 80-wire cable. Thanks Craig