USB3.0 copy speed

[roberto]

I usually make very few copies to USB, but yesterday I made a copy to USB 3.0 with FC 240, 2.9GB in approximately 14 minutes at a speed of 3,407k. With 3521k tips, I took a photo because I was a little surprised. But when going to restore it, copying it to another computer was exaggeratedly slow.
I have intended to replicate it on the origin computer and I can't.
You can tell me if that speed is normal or abnormal.

Saludos

[Doug Bissett]

It is not possible to answer that question. Way too many variables can affect the speed, even when copying from HDD to HDD. For example:

What device are you using, and what is it rated for? Most USB devices operate slower than advertised. I have some USB 2 devices that are faster than some USB 3 devices. Cheap devices never operate at the advertised speed (and good luck trying to get compensation). Even the best (very expensive) USB devices rarely operate at advertised speed (they always quote the fastest, instantaneous, speed, but average speed is always slower). Write is always slower than read too.

What file system(s) are you using (source, and destination)? FAT32 is extremely slow (even in windows). How big is (are) the file system cache(s)?. What parameters are you using for the cache(s)? In fact, you are probably better off not using a cache, at all, when using USB devices, but few file systems (if any) allow you to turn off the cache. The latest FAT32 driver has an option to turn off Lazy write for specific drives (look up the /EX: parameter), which seems to speed things up a bit.

What else is the system doing? Trying to do an internet download, while copying to USB, is pretty high impact on both operations.

There are other things that can affect copy speed, but they are smaller impact.

[roberto]

This is a Micro SD Ultra, 32GB Sandisk. Formatted with DFSEE long ago. The origin is a SSD hard drive, with JFS. All very normal.
IFS=C:\OS2\JFS.IFS /LW:64,256,8 /AUTOCHECK:*
"Swappath = C: \ 0 4096"
What interests me most is your opinion of whether it is a good performance or not, by your experience.
I continue without being able to repeat it, so much that I have spoiled the targeta and tells me the OS2 that Chkdsk /F, but does nothing. I put it in W10, and recognized it to the first, and opened my files. In the same laptoop.

The only thing that caught my attention, was the Glocal (country palette) en-US, showed me when I made the flap with a strange source, similar to the photo that commands you, but in the flaps, not in the text like this photo.

Saludos

[Doug Bissett]

This is a Micro SD Ultra, 32GB Sandisk. Formatted with DFSEE long ago. The origin is a SSD hard drive, with JFS. All very normal.
IFS=C:\OS2\JFS.IFS /LW:64,256,8 /AUTOCHECK:*

Not very "normal", at all. I think that war the default for ancient IBM servers. Having done some experimenting with those parameters, I have concluded that they *may* work with old hardware, but they are not even close to being suitable for modern hardware. IBM chose:

Code: [Select]

IFS=Y:\OS2\JFS.IFS /LW:5,20,4 /AUTOCHECK:*before they abandoned OS/2. That seems to be far better, but it is still for old hardware. Having spent some time experimenting, I decided that it works as well as anything else (mostly because modern hardware is fast enough, that humans can't tell the difference). I did try your parameters, and things really slowed down.

"Swappath = C: \ 0 4096"

Why would you use a minimum size of zero bytes? That is surely going to cause problems if swap ever fills up. How much real memory do you have? If it is more than 2 GB, swap will probably never be used anyway.

What interests me most is your opinion of whether it is a good performance or not, by your experience.

Since I don't use FC, I can't compare to your numbers. My guess would be that your numbers tend to be on the slow side of "normal" ("normal" being the average of all of the "abnormals"). I usually use RSync to copy files to USB sticks or USB connected HDDs. HDDs are far more consistent, and work in the 17 MB/s range (as measured by RSync). I have a couple of sticks that work in that range, but most work in the 12 MB/s range, and some in the 5 MB/s range (one works at 0.1 MB/s - obviously defective). RSync complicates the numbers because it does reads, and writes, while copying files, and it all depends on whether the USB connectors are working properly (they often don't connect at the optimal speed).

Chkdsk /F, but does nothing.

What do you mean by "nothing"? Is it hung? Is it telling you that nothing is wrong?

The only thing that caught my attention, was the Glocal (country palette) en-US, showed me when I made the flap with a strange source, similar to the photo that commands you, but in the flaps, not in the text like this photo.

I don't understand what you are trying to say. If you use a different language, and code page, to read it, than was used to write it, almost anything can happen.

[roberto]

Is formated as Fat32.
I put it again in W10, I said it repair it and this operation in Arcaos is ok.
saludos

[roberto]

I did try your parameters, and things really slowed down.

I see the same, slowed, now.

"Swappath = C: \ 0 4096"

Why would you use a minimum size of zero bytes? That is surely going to cause problems if swap ever fills up. How much real memory do you have? If it is more than 2 GB, swap will probably never be used anyway.

I like how good it goes.

What interests me most is your opinion of whether it is a good performance or not, by your experience.

Since I don't use FC, ...

Thanks

Chkdsk /F, but does nothing.

What do you mean by "nothing"? Is it hung? Is it telling you that nothing is wrong?

You send the instruction and wait and wait ... and restart.

The only thing that caught my attention, was the Glocal (country palette) en-US, showed me when I made the flap with a strange source, similar to the photo that commands you, but in the flaps, not in the text like this photo.

I don't understand what you are trying to say. If you use a different language, and code page, to read it, than was used to write it, almost anything can happen.

I only use a language, it is es_ES_EURO, but sometimes, I put en_US, for test with the dbexpert. This is not the case. I only e used es_ES_EURO. But I have other possible languages for test.
What I mean is that, when the superior flaps that say; Time, Date, Monetary .... They were with the font of the photo. Helv 12 ??

saludos

[roberto]

If I can repeat it, it is simple:
DISKCACHE=4096000,LW
But I can only do it from the computer to memory, but from memory to the computer it is very very slow.
That possible values should modify in order to read the memory at the same speed. I should not work at the same speed in both senses.
Saludos