[kwlug-disc] ext3 on Windows

Sun Jul 4 15:56:04 EDT 2010

bswitzer blogged in http://kwlug.org/node/750 :

> All tests were performed under the Windows 7 that came with the 1201n,
> writing to the ext3 partition.

Wait, what?  ext3 on Win7 ?

> Source file is on a Windows XP machine (Pentium D, 2.80
> GHz, dual-core), reading from an ext3 partition.

What again?  What manner of Windows drivers are you using?  The only ext drivers I know of only understand ext2 at best...

--Bob.

-- 

Bob Jonkman <bjonkman at sobac.com>         http://sobac.com/sobac/
SOBAC Microcomputer Services              Voice: +1-519-669-0388
6 James Street, Elmira ON  Canada  N3B 1L5  Cel: +1-519-635-9413
Software   ---   Office & Business Automation   ---   Consulting

> 
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 15:04 -0400, webhost at kwlug.org wrote:
> Greetings mail-forum-merge,
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Recent content - 1 new post
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 1. (My) Home Network Speed Test Results: wired vs 802.11n 5GHz 300Mbps
> wi-fi - copper wins, hands down.
> Published Blog entry by bswitzer
> [ http://kwlug.org/node/750 ]
> 
> So, having acquired a new laptop, an ASUS Eee PC 1201N [1] (Pros: dual
> core, bluetooth, hdmi out, 802.11n; Cons: not gigabit, not 5GHz 802.11n,
> takes 2x4GB memory but will only use 4GB of it, very poor battery life,
> $60 additional power adapters!), it seemed time to upgrade my wi-fi
> infrastructure too. Something gigabit with 802.11n and USB. So I also
> picked up a Netgear WNDR3700 Rangemax™ Dual Band Wireless-N Gigabit
> Router [2]. Eventually, I discovered that the 1201n's network adapter
> was not gigabit, so picked up a Sabrent USB-G1000 USB 2.0 to Gigabit
> 10/100/1000 Ethernet Adapter Network RJ-45 Converter [3] [I was curious,
> more than anything else, and figured USB 480Mbps had to be significantly
> faster than full duplex Ethernet 100 Mbps - NOT], and discovered that
> the 802.11n was 2.4GHz only (there are something like 29 2.4GHz wi-fi
> networks I can reach from my Dining Room, surprisingly, many of them
> 802.11n). So I also had to pick up a Netgear WNDA3100 RangeMax Dual Band
> Wireless-N USB 2.0 Adapter [4]. The house backbone is already on gigabit
> switches. I've got Rogers Express for my ISP (phone lines too poor for
> ADSL), which is to say, 10 Mbps up / 512 Kbps down. Not that the ISP
> really makes any difference for our purposes here - anything internal
> will be far faster than out the ISP, and it's very, very, seldom that
> any website comes even close to the download speed limit. Ubuntu
> torrents do, but that is a very rare exception.
> - most of the time, the 2.4GHz wi-fi will only connect at 65 Mbps. There
> are just too many other 2.4GHz nets around. The 5GHz always gets 300
> Mbps. I'm perhaps 6' away from the router at the time of these tests.
> - in some senses, OpenWRT has been a boon, in others, not so much.
> Although I always expected to go to OpenWRT, what drove me to it from
> the stock Netgear firmware, within the month, is simply that the stock
> firmware could not set the time - ntp is only used out the WAN port, and
> I'm not using the WAN port! [Not having the time set is unacceptable,
> let alone stupid - trying to examine log files with different times is
> just ... silly.] After a ridiculously large amount of reading, I
> traversed the OpenWRT learning curve, and OpenWRT 'just works.' [See
> forum threads at openwrt.org [5] for everything you need to know for
> OpenWRT on the WNDR3700 - search for threads with 'WNDR3700' in the
> title.] If I had to do it again, today, it might take me, perhaps, 10
> minutes - AFTER confirming the device was supported, and found and
> downloaded the firmware. Add another 10 to enable the radios and set up
> wi-fi. Amazing.
> - the only reason OpenWRT is not a boon at the moment, is I'm not really
> using it for anything the stock Netgear firmware, also OpenWRT, by the
> way, doesn't give me. Except, of course, it gets the time. It's all just
> routing (to the NTP server), so why the heck Netgear has it only on the
> WAN port ...
> - some day I'll switch DHCP, DNS, NTP, PXE, and the like, onto the
> router, and kill my CentOS server, but no time for that today. Given the
> slow speed of the router, relative to today's CPUs, that is, there may
> be little point to hanging a 2TB USB drive off of it, for backups and
> video - I don't expect it will keep up, especially to the GB. While
> still serving the internet. Of course, I could be wrong. Perhaps I'll
> find out some day.
> - OpenWrt allowed me to play with channels, and use 2 channels at once
> [See 802.11n on Wikipedia [6]]. In my area, there are a lot of nets on
> channel 11, and even more on 6. Channel 1 also has enough to be
> annoying. For 2.4GHz I tend to get double speed on channel 5, doubled
> with channel 3. Less so doubled with 9. Curiously, the built-in wi-fi of
> the 802.11n tends to double at 150 Mbps, while the USB adapter doubles
> to 130Mbps.
> - Not that 2.4GHz is practical, speed wise, but with the USB adapter,
> and thus 5GHz, 300Mbps isn't so bad.
> - Nothing, as you will see, compares with copper. Sadly.
> Network speed is VERY important. I can sling GB's of backups around the
> home network at night. Casual tests in the past have shown that
> transfers go from days to hours, 100Mbps to Gigabit, full duplex both.
> All tests were performed under the Windows 7 that came with the 1201n,
> writing to the ext3 partition. Data file was a new 10GB vm disk file,
> except for the SD card where it was 2GB, due to the (Windows) FAT32 file
> size limitation. Source file is on a Windows XP machine (Pentium D, 2.80
> GHz, dual-core), reading from an ext3 partition. All hard drives SATA -
> 300 Mbps / probably 5400 RPM source, 1201n is proably 4200 RPM.
> - all results, MBps.
> 
> 
>  1.08 - ISP, www.bandwidthplace.com [7]
>  2.32 - 802.11g, 2.4GHz, 54Mbps (linksys usb)
>  3.34 - 802.11n, 2.4GHz, 65Mbps (1201 internal)
>  3.46 - SD to same SD copy. {OUCH! wi-fi is faster!}
>  3.98 - 802.11n, 2.4GHz, 130Mbps (netgear usb)
>  4.29 - SATA to SD (1201 internal)
>  4.79 - 802.11n, 2.4GHz, 150Mbps (1201 internal)
>  6.08 - 802.11n, 5GHz, 300Mbps (netgear usb)
>  7.60 - 100 Mbps wired
>  7.90 - 1Gps wired (usb)
>  8.72 - SATA to same SATA (1201n)
>  9.00 - 100 Mbps wired - anomalous result, from 20 days earlier
> 10.19 - SD to SATA (1201n)
> 17.40 - (Source) SATA to same SATA
> 
> 
> NOTE: Nobody should take these test results for their absolute numbers.
> Too many variables - these results are for my particular set of
> circumstances / hardware, at that particular time. I do think, however,
> that you can bank on the speeds relative to each technology. IMO. You
> could tweak any given technology to achieve better results, no doubt,
> but generally, for the average user, I expect one can reasonably rely on
> these results, relatively.
> Personal Conclusions:
> - since the 1201n has such poor battery life, and so I'm trailing around
> a power adapter anyways, and since I have wired enough jacks in my home
> and have sufficiently long ethernet cables, wi-fi is pointless.
> - given a netbook, without a Gbps wired ethernet port, the USB gigabit
> adapter is pointless. The 300 KBps gained isn't worth any cost. Too many
> other slow technologies are present. But, one doesn't acquire a netbook
> for extreme speed.
> - the SD results were interesting. Especially SD to itself (read &
> write), Sata to SD (write), and SD to Sata (read).
> - 802.11n 2.4GHz is probably pointless, given the number of wi-fi homes.
> Go 5GHz or don't bother. CHECK THAT YOUR POTENTIAL LAPTOP PURCHASE IS
> DUAL BAND / 5GHz. DON'T REPLACE YOUR CURRENT WI-FI ROUTER, OTHERWISE.
> - since so much of 802.11n is still 2.4GHz, no point in replacing your
> cordless phones, except to 1.9GHz DECT. Both keeping your 2.4GHz phones,
> and replacing them with 5GHz phones, is self-defeating.
> - copper, particularly Gigabit, really is worth the effort. Particularly
> once you get over the unnecessary FUD of running cable or poking holes
> in your floor. Myself, I just made small holes in the corner of a room -
> didn't even try to go up the wall (studs), or went down the heating
> ducts. Haven't looked back, since. Except, to pointlessly try 802.11n,
> largely wasting the $.
> - the results show, clearly, that 300Mbps is a fantasy. It may be true,
> but the associated overhead means that comparing wi-fi speeds to wired
> speeds is, IMO, fraud on the part of the industry. One would reasonably
> have thought any wi-fi over 100 Mbps would be faster than wired 100
> Mbps. NOT!
> YMMV.
> Hope this is useful for anyone considering a network upgrade,
> particularly in wi-fi, and wondering if the speed gain will be worth the
> $ spent. Not likely. But my results should at least give you an in-home
> ballpark of what you might be looking at.
> Comments welcome.
> 
> [1] http://ca.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=sZ0sI6WqjnCHGFta
> [2]
> http://www.netgear.com/Products/WirelessRouter/WirelessRoutersforHighPerformance/WNDR3700.aspx
> [3] http://sabrent.com/#itemName=NETWORK&itemID=103&section=Product
> [4]
> http://netgear.com/Products/WirelessAdapter/WirelessAdaptersforHighPerformance/WNDA3100.aspx
> [5] https://forum.openwrt.org
> [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n
> [7] http://www.bandwidthplace.com
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Recent comments - 1 new comment
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 1 new comment attached to Blog entry posted by Raul Suarez: Installing a
> Lexmark x1155 using the z600 driver
>    1. Oops, I didn't notice that by Raul Suarez
>      http://kwlug.org/node/742#comment-748
> 
> 