Re: Life after NSLU2?

--- In nslu2-general%40yahoogroups.com">nslu2-generalyahoogroups.com, "Carl Lowenstein"
<clowenstein...> wrote:
&gt;
> On 3/28/08, Carl Zetie <carl.zetie...> wrote:
&gt; >
>; > docbillnet:
> > >Why not buy another NSLU2?
&gt; > Because the file transfer speed is just too slow. It's OK for
overnight
> > backups where throughput really doesn't matter, and as a
learning platform
> > for Linux, but as a file server it just doesn't cut it. When
the USB
> > interface runs at (theoretically) 480Mbps and the network
interface is
> > capable of 100Mbps (and I'm thinking of upgrading to gigabit
Ethernet), file
>; > transfer speeds that top out at just a handful of Mbps is pretty
&gt; > disappointing.
>
> By the way, one should be careful about megabits and megabytes.
The
&gt; USB interface is 480 megabits per second, which is 60 megabytes per
> second. The ethernet at 100 megabits per second actually tops out
at
&gt; about 10 megabytes per second.
>
> Achieved data transfer rates using dd(1) between two USB disks
seem to
> top out at 10 megabytes per second. Every byte is handled twice
by
&gt; the CPU, once for reading and once for writing.. If one uses
rsync,
> the extra checksum calculations saturate the slow CPU in the NSLU2
and
&gt; the disk to disk rate drops to 3 megabytes per second.
>
> So yes, it isn't the worlds fastest CPU and asking it to do all
this
> extra stuff makes the over-all transfer rate pretty slow.
&gt;
> But remeber that a handful of megabytes is eight hands full of
megabits.
>
> carl
>; --
> carl lowenstein
> marine physical lab, u.c. san diego
&gt; clowenstein...
>;

Messages in this topic (7) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.