On Wed Feb 2 11, Ulrich Spörlein wrote: > On Wed, 02.02.2011 at 12:04:58 -0800, Xin LI wrote: > > On 02/02/11 11:54, Alexander Best wrote: > > > so far dd(1) with a bs=2048 finished after: > > > > > > 4676648960 bytes transferred in 1639.108763 secs (2853166 bytes/sec) > > > > Just curious - how will recoverdisk(1) perform? I haven't tried it > > myself but it uses much larger window which could be faster. > > +1 for recoverdisk. I hacked it so that it will also cope with media > that has weird sectorsizes like 2352 bytes. It is awesome for reading > optical media now, thanks to retries, large read requests and the > ability to save progress (so you can try the failing sectors in another > drive). thanks a lot for all your replies. :) here are some statistics i gathered: LINUX: ----- 6,8 MB/s _at_ bs=2048 6,7 MB/s _at_ ibs=1M obs=64M 6,6 MB/s _at_ bs=32K FreeBSD: ------- 2,8 MB/s _at_ bs=2048 9,5 MB/s with recoverdisk /wo failures 9,5 MB/s _at_ ibs=1m obs=64m 9,5 MB/s _at_ ibs=32k obs=64m indeed recoverdisk seems to be ideal for my case. i'll try to use it more often. ;) thanks again. cheers. alex ps: seems linux is completely ignoring blocksizes, but that's their problem. ;) > > Regards, > Uli -- a13xReceived on Wed Feb 02 2011 - 21:34:12 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:11 UTC