dbminter

Was burning an image to a DVD+RW when the Topic error message came up at the start of Verify. I've never seen it before, but, it probably has a reasonable explanation. The image was a CD sized one that I was burning to DVD purposefully. I've done this before, burning CD sized data images to DVD for testing things like bootable discs, etc. But, this is the first time I've ever come across this dialog. But, I am guess that is what it means? That the file data type was CD, given its size of about 785 MB, and the device data type was DVD+RW, based on the disc present in the device?

Lucky you! Kind of like how on the 2005 season of Doctor Who. Russell T. Davies took nearly every opportunity he could to slam Cardiff for some reason.

Yeah, I know what you meant. The bridge chip. We've had more than a fair share of bridge posts with those bloody ALI's and semaphore time outs.

I don't know the chip set in the first drive. Never opened it. The 2nd one I opened but didn't think to check. It may be NEC, BUT I could just be transposing the chip that was on the PCI card that didn't work. However, opening the drive to check, should I ever need to, is relatively easy.

Maybe it's actually lfcrule5 instead. That ye olde lfcrule is really ye olde, 1972 years old. And this newbie is a newbie quite literally: 5 years old. But, quite a literate 5 year old.

If I'm getting 28,xxx KB/s, then, that should be roughly equivalent to 28 MB/s. CONSISTENCY, PEOPLE! So, that seems to be on par with what USB 2 should be. The slow speeds appear to be caused by that one weird case that happens with the 2nd drive, but, not with the first. Either because of the design, construction, or configuration of the HD in the enclosure or the enclosure itself. Because it only happens when the drive is powered off and then back on.

Yeah, 26,xxx instead of 26. Typed in anger.

Okay, rebooted, checked the I/O's on drives 1 and 2, powered off drive 1, powered it back on, rechecked the I/O, and got the same value as before. Powered off drive 2, powered it back on, checked the I/O, and, as expected, the I/O plumetted. Checked the I/O on drive 1, and, strangely, as I expected drive 1's I/O did NOT change. Without rebooting, turned off drive 1, turned it back on, rechecked the I/O, and it had not changed! Checked the I/O on drive 2 again, and, it was the expected still lesser value. So, the conclusion is that something in drive 2 causes this effect ONLY if it is NOT the only attached drive and ONLY if it has been powered off/powered back on or disconnected/reconnected. Which means for drive 2, I need to remember to reboot IF I ever have to turn it off/disconnect it and turn it on/reconnect it. I wonder if the same process repeats if I connect one drive to the front and another to the back? I wonder if it repeats if I use Safely Remove Hardware first... time to get to work! It DOES repeat if I Safely Remove first AND power off and power on. It does NOT repeat if I Safely Remove and disconnect and reconnect the drive. Time to test just disconnecting and reconnecting. It's only with the drive powered off and on, it seems. Even without Safely Remove, disconnecting and reconnecting the data cable did not cause the problem. And, the last test. If the drive is powered off at any point and powered on, the system MUST be rebooted to restore the full write speed. Just logging off and back on did NOT help. I also wonder what it is about the 2nd drive that causes this phenomenon... something in the bridge? ALI?! Or the drive in the enclosure itself? DAMN! I had the drive opened up the other night! I should have checked the chip when I was able to look at it. Oh, well, at least, once I got rid of the screw that WOULDN'T come out without pliers... the drive is easily reopened for future examination.

Okay, I think I finally have some "SENSE" of this damn problem. There's something happening that I cannot explain its reason, but, it's the cause. There ARE two different speeds being reported by the 2nd USB drive. Whenever the 2nd drive is connected/powered on for the first time, it behaves "normally" writing an image file in Build mode at about 11x. Whenever this drive is the ONLY one connected, it can be powered off/disconnected and reconnected without problem. BUT, if the drive is connected WITH the other USB 2 HD, THEN something interesting happens. Disconnecting the 2nd drive or powering it off and reconnecting it/powering it on causes the slow speed thing. The write rate drops to about 4x instead, or about 1/3. WHY this happens... Did a quick test with this in HDD Tools. The I/O Rate plunges from 27,xxx KB/s to 9xx KB/s. Need to reboot and see if this process repeats on the first drive. IF it doesn't, then, it seems to backup, FINALLY a conclusion of mine through all this silly process!

Another joke that writes itself! Check out the title of this page, from an Icelandic museum devoted to various aspects of the penis of multiple animals. http://www.phallus.is/megin.php?tunga=en&val=3

Good! I am still puzzled by at least one thing, though. What is causing that Hi-Speed device connected to a slow speed port message?

Now, more importantly... how confident are you that your USB 2 HD is running at Hi-Speed?

EXCELLENT! That's basically how long I let my values run. Until the I/O Rate returns a solid value, or a minute, or when the values level off... or I get pissed at waiting.

Actually, yes, I think it does. That I/O rate is in the same mean as my own. Between 25 and 31. How long did it take for that to run? Approximate time will do. And, what is the size of the drive? Thanks!

Well, opening up the case was a goddamn waste of time. The PCI card won't even start! Code 10. Cannot start. Fuckers! I guess the card is too old.

What would I use to gauge the transfer rate? The only thing I know is that it would have taken 50 minutes to copy a 4 GB file from the USB drive to the SATA drive in the test I ran a few days ago. As for the 30 MB/s, I am not even CERTAIN that is the value I'm looking for! Once someone can confirm that is the benchmark result I can be sure. For instance, is this the benchmark value I should be looking for in Sandra? It's the one I've been using:

No real way I have to test it on another PC other than to set up the parts of another one, A COMPAQ! :& in place of the one here. And, we ALL know that I'll just waste my time doing that because the same thing is going to happen.

I don't think I have such a CD. This image was loaded directly from the factory default partition backup image I made before even loading Windows XP SP 1 2002 Version for the first time. The only drivers included outside of an XP disc were some RAID drivers and other updates not relative to my particular setup for this model. So, such an update would already be "loaded." Well, in the meantime, while others think over my posts and reply eventually...? I think I'll just pop open the case and insert the Belkin USB 2.0 PCI card from 2002 and see what I get from there. I'll be using the cable that came with the drive, so, the cable type shouldn't matter. According to this one link http://www.everythingusb.com/usb2/faq.htm it says that if Sandra returns anything over 12Mbps it is Hi-Speed. BUT, OF COURSE, THEY'RE INCONSISTENT! They don't say UNDER WHAT Sandra should return this value. And, because I'm not sure WHERE to look, I'm NOT entirely sure I'm looking at the right data! Because NOTHING thus far has been in Mbps but in MB/s! BECAUSE a megabit per second is NOT the same as a megabyte per second! SHEESH! CONSISTENCY, PEOPLE! Speaking of which... according to Wikipedia... 12 Mbps is FULL SPEED! NOT HI-SPEED! That should be 480 (Mbps/Mbits)/sec! WHAT THE FUCK IS UP WITH THESE PEOPLE!? Which damn value is it?! You know what? I'm just going to ask Lightning. You say that anything greater than 1Mb/sec I/O Rate in HDD Tools is Hi-Speed, correct?

Shamus Okay, deleted all entries under USB controllers, rebooted, let Windows reinstall them, rebooted, turned on the drive connected to the front, let it be detected and installed, rebooted again, rebooted again and then ran HDDT and Shandra. Same results.

Now, this makes NO sense at all... I expected when I connected the drive to the back USB ports and turned the drive off and then back on, to get the Hi-Speed device connected to a low speed port. WRONG! Got NOTHING this time! SHEESH! Still getting 27 Kbs/sec I/O Rate in HHDT and and 30 Mbs/s benchmark in Sandra that way... Shamus, okay, going to try deleting the channels and rebooting. Want to be that's gonna do a damn? BTW, was that Benchmark value the one you were looking for?

Okay, rebooted, disconnected all USB devices, and logged in. Reran Sandra and got the same results. So, it does appear that the four ports in the back are USB 1.1 and the two in the front are USB 2.0. Thus, I have been wasting a lot of potential, it seems. However, the front port HDD Tools test result still irks me. So, time to run it again! Well, the good news is that with only that drive connected to the front port, turning it off after it was detected and turning it back on did NOT return that previous message about the Hi-Speed device connected to a slow speed port. So, that seems to be good news. That with the other drive connected to a USB 1.1 port, it might have been the reason why the front port returned that value? That the front port took on the slowest available speed? I know some devices do that, like IDE in various chains, etc. CHRIST! Unfortunately, I'm STILL only getting about 27 to 31k on the HDD Tools I/O Rate! Even with ONLY that one drive connected AND connected to the front USB ports! Tested both ports! Okay, so, what do I do from here? I'm supposed to be getting larger than 27 k? Sandra is returning results these results, but, I'm not sure they correspond with HDD Tools. I ran a benchmark under Benchmarks --> Physical Disks --> and selected the USB drive. The first item returned in the list of results: Benchmark Results Drive Index: 30 MB/s Is this the value you were looking for, Shamus? Lightning, were you saying that HDD Tool's I/O Rate should be greater than 1 MB/s then to correspond with USB 2.0 Hi-Speed?

Replies, please, on the back of a post card to Blue Peter!

Okay, trying images again. Controller 3 and 4 have the exact same information as 1 and 2. Now, take a look at Controller 5: I think we're getting a handle on the problem. The back controllers DO seem to be USB 1.1 ONLY. So, connecting these drives in the back to reduce cable clutter from the front has apparently slowed down the usefulness of these drives for two years! So, the USB 2.0 is only the front ports. Is that what others would agree with? How can I test those ports, specifically, to make sure? i.e. *I* know the front two ports are the front two ports, but, what does the COMPUTER think they are? BUT, I am still confused, then, over why when connected to the front, the drives still only returned 27 k? Could it be because the other drive was always connected to the USB 1.1 ports at the time? Thus, the USB 2 port connected drive would only operate at the slowest speed because the other was? Just a guess. Looks like if I want to keep the front clear of cable clutter, I need to use that PCI card to get the USB 2 in the back. Anyone else care to confirm, deny, or question what I've concluded? Because, believe me, even *I* need help!

Sandra is an acronym for something or other. A collection of tools that return all kinds of wonderful information on the PC, it seems. An image, yes. Thanks! GOD! The world is full of FUCKERS! Points to ImgShack for hosting without resizing... BUT, still gave a fucker error. With NO indication of what file types are allowed or not, it seems BMP is not allowed. BUT, they tell ME it's not allowed only AFTER I tried to send it and bitched at ME like I had transgressed some unwritten law! IDIOTS!

Found the box that the newer drive came in. It says it is Hi-Speed USB 2.0. USB 2.0 transfer rate: 480 Mbits/s Rotational speed: 7200 RPM Memory cache: 2 MB or greater. BUT, can all/any of that be trusted? Okay, just started digging around in Sandra. I think I see a little of what is going on here. Maybe. First, check out this return of the USB controllers: CHRIST! Where the fuck can I store something that won't get resized so it can DAMN WELL BE SEEN?! Anyway, in the meantime, I'll just text the results. 01.) USB Controller/Hub - Intel ® 82801EB USB Universal Host Controller - 24D2 02.) USB Controller/Hub - Intel ® 82801EB USB Universal Host Controller - 24D4 03.) USB Controller/Hub - " " - 24D7 04.) USB Controller/Hub - Intel ® 82801EB USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 24DD ( Well, it DID say enhanced! ) 05.) USB Controller/Hub - Intel ® 82801EB USB Universal Host Controller - 24DE 06.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Root Hub 07.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Root Hub 08.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Root Hub 09.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Root Hub 10.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Root Hub 11.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Printing Support 12.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Mass Storage Device 13.) USB Controller/Hub - USB Mass Storage Device 14.) USB Controller/Hub - Generic USB Hub There are 4 USB ports in the back and 2 USB ports on the front of the PC. I am starting to believe that the 4 in the back are USB 1.1 and the two in the front are USB 2.0. HOWEVER, the hardware is telling me this, BUT the HDD Tools read rates are the SAME regardless of which ports I'm using, front or back. Notes: 11 - Serial/parallel, whatever the Hell they call it now, to USB convertor to connect the printer by USB since, at the time, I needed the printer port for something else. I no longer do and may, probably should, connect that back over its old connection. 12 and 13 are the two USB external HD's, of course. 14 - 1 General Electric USB 1.x hub with a whopping 1 device currently connected. (Too lazy to disconnect it because sometimes I need the Flash drive cable connected.)