Slow Writing to Lexar Jump Drive

[Charlie McVeigh]

I have a 128 MB USB Lexar Jump Drive.  It worked reliably for me for
close to a year.  About a month ago it became painfully slow when
writing large files to it (both Fedora and Windows) - It takes about 24
minutes to write a 4.5 MB file to it.   Read speed from the device
appears to be as fast as always.

I contacted Lexar and they suggested that I reformat the device with
FAT32 format.  After reformatting to FAT32 read/write speed when using
Windows appears to be back to normal.   However when automounted on my
FC3 desktop the write speed is still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB
file.   Fast on Windows slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?

Of course Lexar is no help when it comes to Linux.

[Andy Green]

Charlie McVeigh wrote:
> FC3 desktop the write speed is still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB
> file.   Fast on Windows slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
>
> Of course Lexar is no help when it comes to Linux.

What are the mount options?  sync?  That could be evil apparently.

-Andy

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

> > > > > "CM" == Charlie McVeigh  writes:

CM> However when automounted on my FC3 desktop the write speed is
CM> still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB file.  Fast on Windows
CM> slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?

It will be slow if mounted with the "sync" option.  Under FC3 this is
the default; I hacked HAL to drop the "sync".  My hacked HAL packages
are at http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/hal-nosync/

These packages also include the fix for the floppy mounting problem.

- J<

[Charlie McVeigh]

On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 17:33 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > > > > "CM" == Charlie McVeigh  writes:
>
> CM> However when automounted on my FC3 desktop the write speed is
> CM> still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB file.  Fast on Windows
> CM> slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
>
> It will be slow if mounted with the "sync" option.  Under FC3 this is
> the default; I hacked HAL to drop the "sync".  My hacked HAL packages
> are at http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/hal-nosync/
>
> These packages also include the fix for the floppy mounting problem.
> J<

Thanks for the responses so far.  The Jump Drive is being mounted with
the sync option.

Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired mount
without the sync option?   If I need to install the RPM's from the link
above do I install them all?

Thanks.

To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4

[Kahn Seidl]

Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut, and I love it.  But, now 
that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have to consider it.

I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that compare to a fresh 
install?  I know with windows, doing an upgrade is, well... pretty crappy.  
But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this respect.

And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this something I can fix in the code? 
    I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they worked fine on fc3 the 
last time I tried it on a seperate partition.

Thanks,
Martin

To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4

[L. Paul Andralouis]

Hi Kahn:

It seems like most of the things that made me
regret updating this Notebook PC to FC4 have been
fixed.  I am still holding out on a desktop, but I
would upgrade it if something came through that I felt
I needed that wouldn't run on FC3.

FYI the menu system under Gnome on FC4 is very
slow, whereas the KDE one is working fine.  I suggest
using KDE.

I do not do allot of development work, but the
few things that I have compiled under FC4 are working
fine.

Best Regards,
               L. Paul Andralouis

--- Kahn Seidl  wrote:
> Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut,
> and I love it.  But, now 
> that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have
> to consider it.
>
> I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that
> compare to a fresh 
> install?  I know with windows, doing an upgrade is,
> well... pretty crappy.  
> But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this
> respect.
>
> And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this
> something I can fix in the code? 
>     I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they
> worked fine on fc3 the 
> last time I tried it on a seperate partition.
>
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
> -- 
> fedora-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe:
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com

To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4

[Edwin Dicker]

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
On Behalf Of Kahn Seidl
Sent: Friday, 11 November, 2005 05:37
To: [e-mail]
Subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4

Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut, and I love it.  But, now
that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have to consider it.

I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that compare to a fresh 
install?  I know with windows, doing an upgrade is, well... pretty crappy.  
But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this respect.

And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this something I can fix in the code?

I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they worked fine on fc3 the 
last time I tried it on a seperate partition.

Thanks,
Martin

I've been using fedora since the first release and always wondered about:
would I upgrade or do a fresh install.
> From FC1 to FC2 I upgraded and it unfortunately failed by a reason I still

do not know, so I did a fresh install.
> From FC2 to FC3 to FC4 I used and upgrade, always with a backup made before

the upgrade to recover from a failed upgrade. Fortunately I never had to use
the backup. I did need to repair some config files after the upgrade, but
that was easy to do compared with fully configure a new server to your
needs.

Upgrade with a fresh backup is my recommendation. ( I never used yum to
upgrade, just the cd's )

Cheers,
Edwin

To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4

[Sergey]

I have upgraded from fc3 to fc4 without any difficulties. First I installed 
fedora-release-4-2 rpm so that /etc/yum.repos.d was updated with the fc4 repo 
locations. Then I just run # yum upgrade and that was it. You can root the 
installer from fc4 CD and choose upgrade system. I don't think you need a 
"clean" installation of fc3 - that would no make sense.

However I have experienced problems caused by implement of python 2.4, so 
check that none of your programs need python 2.3.

To avoid problems with GCC4 you would probably want to install the 
compat-gcc-32-* packages, which provide the backward compatibility.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Edwin Dicker" 
To: "'For users of Fedora Core releases'" 
Subject: RE: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
Date: Saturday 03 December 2005 04:00
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> On Behalf Of Kahn Seidl
> Sent: Friday, 11 November, 2005 05:37
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
>
> Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut, and I love it.  But, now
> that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have to consider it.
>
> I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that compare to a fresh
> install?  I know with windows, doing an upgrade is, well... pretty crappy.
> But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this respect.
>
> And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this something I can fix in the code?
>
> I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they worked fine on fc3 the
> last time I tried it on a seperate partition.
>
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
> I've been using fedora since the first release and always wondered about:
> would I upgrade or do a fresh install.
> > From FC1 to FC2 I upgraded and it unfortunately failed by a reason I still
>
> do not know, so I did a fresh install.
> > From FC2 to FC3 to FC4 I used and upgrade, always with a backup made before
>
> the upgrade to recover from a failed upgrade. Fortunately I never had to use
> the backup. I did need to repair some config files after the upgrade, but
> that was easy to do compared with fully configure a new server to your
> needs.
>
> Upgrade with a fresh backup is my recommendation. ( I never used yum to
> upgrade, just the cd's )
>
> Cheers,
> Edwin

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

> > > > > "CM" == Charlie McVeigh  writes:

CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
CM> mount without the sync option?

It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
the two occurrences of:

<merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync" type="bool">true</merge>

and change the "true" to "false".  Or grab my RPMs, put them in an
empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".

- J<

Slow Writing to Lexar Jump Drive (SOLVED)

[Charlie McVeigh]

On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 23:01 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > > > > "CM" == Charlie McVeigh  writes:
>
> CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
> CM> mount without the sync option?
>
> It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
> the two occurrences of:
>
> <merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync" type="bool">true</merge>
>
> and change the "true" to "false".  Or grab my RPMs, put them in an
> empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".
> J<

Making the changes to  the storage-policy.fdi file did the trick.

Thanks to all who posted.  The quality and speed of support from this
board never ceases to amaze me.

Charlie

Slow Writing to Lexar Jump Drive (SOLVED)

[Frank Elsner]

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:30:30 -0500 Charlie McVeigh wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 23:01 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > > > > > "CM" == Charlie McVeigh  writes:
> >
> > CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
> > CM> mount without the sync option?
> >
> > It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
> > the two occurrences of:
> >
> > <merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync" type="bool">true</merge>
> >
> > and change the "true" to "false".  Or grab my RPMs, put them in an
> > empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".
> > J<
>
> Making the changes to  the storage-policy.fdi file did the trick.

Ok, it works for you.

But "man fstab-sync" says:

|      By  default, the /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi
|      file specifies the policy - this file should never be  edited  by  the
|      system  administrator  as  it  might  get updated by the OS vendor for
|      security updates. Instead, system- or site-specific rules can  be  put
|      in the /usr/share/hal/fdi/95userpolicy directory.

--Frank Elsner

Slow Writing to Lexar Jump Drive (SOLVED)

[Charlie McVeigh]

On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 15:39 +0100, Frank Elsner wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:30:30 -0500 Charlie McVeigh wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 23:01 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > > > > >> "CM" == Charlie McVeigh  writes:
> > >
> > > CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
> > > CM> mount without the sync option?
> > >
> > > It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
> > > the two occurrences of:
> > >
> > > <merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync" type="bool">true</merge>
> > >
> > > and change the "true" to "false".  Or grab my RPMs, put them in an
> > > empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".
> > > J<
> >
> > Making the changes to  the storage-policy.fdi file did the trick.
>
> Ok, it works for you.
>
> But "man fstab-sync" says:
>
> |      By  default, the /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi
> |      file specifies the policy - this file should never be  edited  by  the
> |      system  administrator  as  it  might  get updated by the OS vendor for
> |      security updates. Instead, system- or site-specific rules can  be  put
> |      in the /usr/share/hal/fdi/95userpolicy directory.
>
> --Frank Elsner

I stand corrected.  Putting storage-policy.fdi in the 95userpolicy
directory works as advertised.

Charlie

[Michael H. Warfield]

On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 17:48 -0500, Charlie McVeigh wrote:
> I have a 128 MB USB Lexar Jump Drive.  It worked reliably for me for
> close to a year.  About a month ago it became painfully slow when
> writing large files to it (both Fedora and Windows) - It takes about 24
> minutes to write a 4.5 MB file to it.   Read speed from the device
> appears to be as fast as always.
> I contacted Lexar and they suggested that I reformat the device with
> FAT32 format.  After reformatting to FAT32 read/write speed when using
> Windows appears to be back to normal.   However when automounted on my
> FC3 desktop the write speed is still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB
> file.   Fast on Windows slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
> Of course Lexar is no help when it comes to Linux.

With the drive mounted type "mount" with no parameters and check the
mount options for the drive.  If it says "sync" in the list of options,
that's the source of your problem.  There are other threads over the
past several months regarding this and the sync option has been removed
from the relevant hal configuration files.  You should update and/or
correct that situation to eliminate the sync option.

Mike