Jump to content

Just bought a new SSD, now what?


securitybreach
 Share

Recommended Posts

securitybreach

Well I finally took the plunge and just bought a Samsung 40 EVO-Series 120GB SATA III Solid State Drive. The drive is super fast with:

 

Worry-free data security with AES 256-bit full-disk encryption

Sequential Read Speed 540 MB / Sequential Write Speed 410 MB / Random Read Speed 94K / Random Write Speed 35

I have putting it off for a long time waiting on the price per gb to go down as I already have 6.5 terabytes of spinning drives. I finally decided to take the plunge with some of my birthday money as the sata drives are the only bottleneck on my main system. I plan on using about 40gb of it for my / partition and the rest will be for a somewhat empty /home partition that will just have links pointing to my old /home partition data (~ 800gb). I also plan to point all my downloads and everything to the old /home partition as I could easily fill it up in a few weeks.

 

I may try to migrate the installation like Ian did: http://forums.scotsn...showtopic=69213 but then again, I may go with a fresh install since I now have a much faster internet connection (120 down and 25 up) and I have all my configs backed up already. I just need to backup a list of applications and start fetching them. I should get the drive Tuesday so I will be reinstalling Tuesday night after work or Wednesday morning. Wish me luck B)

 

ArchWiki: Migrate installation to new hardware

Archwiki: SSD

Thanks Adam for helping me choose which one to buy! :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

Your next step is to ship that SSD to me so you can avoid all the troubles of migrating your operating system from your mech drives to this one. I'm here to help. ;)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Josh, glad to hear you have yourself an SSD now, you will be amazed at the speed. Would like to provide some advice based on issues that I ran into. 1.) GO with a fresh install. It's just the easiest least painful way to go.

 

2.) Create your package-off.txt and package-loc.txt and let pacman and yaourt do the rest. In about 45 minutes or so (maybe less because you have MUCH faster DL speed than I do) you will have everything you had on the original drive. Save a copy of your /var/cache/pacman/pkg in case you have to downgrade something that may now have a dependency issue. Only had about 2 things I needed that for but was SO happy I had it. If only there was a folder that kept all of the old AUR packages. ;) You may find when migrating your AUR packages that you run into some applications where their dependencies are no longer included in the AUR. Prime example for me that comes to mind was an app I use quite often called Shutter. There was a perl package that was no longer included in the AUR: perl-file-copy-recursive. I can still get that from the perl website, just have not gotten around to it yet. There were a couple of others as well. YOu are far more techy than I am so of course the SSD Arch Wiki is much more easier for you to understand than I but it also provides plenty of good info in regards to your fstab entries required for the full SSD experience. So, I can say with all certainty that a fresh install of Arch is the way to go. You will also notice that the Arch installation has changed a lot. Not sure when the last time you installed Arch from scratch but I have done it on both the laptop when I moved over to SSD as well as FrankenstIAN that I just built. Different completely from when you wrote your tutorial, but not dificult at all.

 

3.) You already know all the things you need to save on the original drives like your .config, .themes, /etc configs /usr/share/fonts etc. (mainly mentioning this for others who may be reading it like our very nice guest who NEVER post :hysterical: )

 

3.)Another thing I learned, once you have the SSD up and running, (this applies to SSD or HDD) you may want to see what systemd services you had running on the original HDD and jot them down. You will have to reload them but might find like I did you had services that really did not need to be started on startup that would slow things down.

 

But really, it all was really easy and except for multiple monitors and such, my desktop is pretty much exactly like my laptop. You are using the same computer so that is easy, somethings will act wonky when you move your packages from one make model of computer to another and you have to do A LOT of config changes but who does not LOVE re-writing config files. :thumbup:

 

Good luck, I know YOU well enough to know you will be up and running wth the SSD in no time and be SO happy with the speed improvement. :)

Edited by ichase
Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Great deal, Josh! :thumbup:

 

Can't wait to see how well it does for you playing games on Linux via Steam. ;)

 

I will not store my steam files on the ssd as they are pretty large (45gb) but everything runs silky smooth as far as games go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Ian:

1. I had planned on a fresh install

 

2. I have already created my package lists, pacman cache, /etc, etc. Also, I do not know if you have noticed but I updated the installation guide back January and things have not changed very much at all(I followed it last month for a machine).

 

3. Yes, I have all my files backed up but why would you bother with /usr/share/fonts? These get reinstalled after running the pacman command against my package lists.

 

3b. I am always tweaking my systemd startup files and will reconfigure them on my new install. Speaking of... I do need to backup my custom static network service.

 

Thanks for the encouragement! I am pretty sure I will not have an issue but I know it will require some effort.

 

now what? Install siduction on it of course. ;)

 

Maybe in virtualbox but I am all the way Archlinux.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

but why would you bother with /usr/share/fonts? These get reinstalled after running the pacman command against my package lists.

Well for me, I had a lot of custom fonts that I did not get from the repos such as some of the weather fonts and some I got from dafont.com.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will not store my steam files on the ssd as they are pretty large (45gb) but everything runs silky smooth as far as games go.

 

You might as well have the games on the ssd as you would still have 35 GB left for your /home which you say you are not going to use very much.

If you are not going to put the games on the ssd you could have a 20 or 30 GB partition to try out various os's. Much better than running them in virtual space.

 

You will be blown away with the speed. :blissysmile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

I was worried since I did not have a sata3(sata 6gb/s) cable but it seems like there is no difference between a sata3 and sata2 cable. It is basically marketing sort of like the $200 hdmi cables...

 

While the official SATA-IO SATA-IO documentation states that there is no difference between SATA 3Gb/s and SATA 6Gb/s cables, there were still some people that insisted that you needed a SATA 6Gb/s cable to fully utilize SATA 6Gb/s drives.....

 

Conclusion

Our results confirm that despite the faster hardware available today, there is still no performance difference between SATA 3Gb/s and SATA 6Gb/s cables. The SATA 3Gb/s revision only supports transfer speeds around 300MB/s, yet we saw transfer speeds up to 500 MB/s with each cable that we tested. This clearly shows that the SATA revision designator on cables is mostly just marketing and has no bearing on the actual performance the cable can provide.

 

This is not to say that all cables are created equally, but rather that you cannot base the quality of the cable from the SATA revision it is supposed to be compatible with. A wire is a wire, and as long as the gauge of the wire is adequate, the end connections are good, and the right metal is used, there is no performance difference between one cable and another. The place where some users get into trouble is when they are using a particularly cheap cable that has either bad connections or uses sub-par materials. Even in those instances, however, you would see problems with the drives dropping or not being detected long before you see any sort of decrease in performance.

http://www.pugetsyst...-Revisited-183/

 

I may get a sata3 cable eventually but now I can use one of my many sata2 cables plugged into my sata3 ports. I will use the XFX one as the rest are just generic ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

never even thought about sata3 cables as I am still on sata2. Nice to know there is no need to buy especially :breakfast: for sata3 though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

That is BS... just like "Monster" speaker cable and gold plated connectors. There is NO line loss in sata cables for the short distances we're talking about inside your box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

I think I won... My boot time is 1.4 seconds:

]Startup finished in 1.122s (kernel) + 289ms (userspace) = 1.412s
[/b]

I am still setting up my system, but D*** it is fast...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LilBambi

I think I won... My boot time is 1.4 seconds:

[/size][/b]

I am still setting up my system, but D*** it is fast...

 

Excellent! Man, those SSDs are awesome!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Abarbarian: Well I only reboot if I get a new kernel so not that much

 

Fran: Indeed they are!

 

Sunrat: Yumm, yum cookie....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Wow:

root@Cerberus /home/comhack # hdparm -Tt /dev/sda

 

/dev/sda:

Timing cached reads: 21358 MB in 2.00 seconds = 10688.82 MB/sec

Timing buffered disk reads: 1522 MB in 3.00 seconds = 507.15 MB/sec

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

What's the hurry? I like my 27 second Slackware boot-up. It gives me time to feed the cats, refill the coffee cup, maybe read a bit of the morning paper. You'll miss that now that you have an SSD, Josh. You'll see. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the hurry? I like my 27 second Slackware boot-up. It gives me time to feed the cats, refill the coffee cup, maybe read a bit of the morning paper. You'll miss that now that you have an SSD, Josh. You'll see. :(

 

yup no more twiddling the thumbs whilst a program loads. It will be go go go all the time, stress city. :whistling:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

root@Cerberus /home/comhack # hdparm -Tt /dev/sda

 

/dev/sda:

Timing cached reads: 21358 MB in 2.00 seconds = 10688.82 MB/sec

Timing buffered disk reads: 1522 MB in 3.00 seconds = 507.15 MB/sec

 

 

As a comparison.

 

 

Arch on F3 500GB

hdparm -Tt /dev/sdd

 

/dev/sdd:

Timing cached reads: 2716 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1358.18 MB/sec

Timing buffered disk reads: 436 MB in 3.01 seconds = 144.82 MB/sec

 

Windows7 on a ssd 240 GB

hdparm -Tt /dev/sdc

 

/dev/sdc:

Timing cached reads: 2794 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1397.75 MB/sec

Timing buffered disk reads: 332 MB in 3.01 seconds = 110.35 MB/sec

 

Storage on a F3 500 GB

hdparm -Tt /dev/sde

 

/dev/sde:

Timing cached reads: 2692 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1346.38 MB/sec

Timing buffered disk reads: 312 MB in 3.05 seconds = 102.13 MB/sec

 

 

All read from Arch.

 

Your results are impressive. :thudna5:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

siduction on Vertex2:

/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 13980 MB in 1.99 seconds = 7036.68 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 340 MB in 3.01 seconds = 112.78 MB/sec

As I mentioned elsewhere, AHCI is not set. Must do that some day but I need to do a reg edit in Win 7 first so as not to hose it.

It would be interesting to see uncached writes figure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

root@ericsbane06/home/vtel57:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sda

/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 2284 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1141.47 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 248 MB in 3.02 seconds = 82.15 MB/sec

root@ericsbane06/home/vtel57:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdb

/dev/sdb:
Timing cached reads: 2406 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1202.74 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 190 MB in 3.00 seconds = 63.24 MB/sec

root@ericsbane06/home/vtel57:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdc

/dev/sdc:
Timing cached reads: 2536 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1267.53 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 252 MB in 3.01 seconds = 83.75 MB/sec

 

HAHAHA! :hysterical:

 

Note: sda = WD Raptor 10,000rpm, sdb = WD Caviar (Blue) 7200rpm, sdc = WD Raptor 10,000rpm

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

root@ericsbane06/home/vtel57:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sda

/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 2284 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1141.47 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 248 MB in 3.02 seconds = 82.15 MB/sec

root@ericsbane06/home/vtel57:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdb

/dev/sdb:
Timing cached reads: 2406 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1202.74 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 190 MB in 3.00 seconds = 63.24 MB/sec

root@ericsbane06/home/vtel57:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdc

/dev/sdc:
Timing cached reads: 2536 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1267.53 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 252 MB in 3.01 seconds = 83.75 MB/sec

 

HAHAHA! :hysterical:

 

Note: sda = WD Raptor 10,000rpm, sdb = WD Caviar (Blue) 7200rpm, sdc = WD Raptor 10,000rpm

 

That is quite puzzling ! I would have thought that a Raptor would give better results than my Samsung F3.Guess that Arch runs quicker than Slack is the only reason I can think of. :Laughing:

Especially as your Bane pc has a much better spec than my poor old Longship. :tease:

Edited by abarbarian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Also:

"The more important takeaway is that all of the SSDs, including the 840 Series, performed flawlessly through hundreds of terabytes. A typical consumer won't write anything close to that much data over the useful life of a drive.

 

Even with only six subjects, the fact that we didn't experience any failures until after 700TB is a testament to the endurance of modern SSDs."

http://techreport.co...to-a-petabyte/5

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

That is quite puzzling ! I would have thought that a Raptor would give better results ...

 

Well, the issue with the Raptors is that they are old SATA 1 Raptors; very slow transfer speeds. :( They were free, though, so I wasn't complaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the issue with the Raptors is that they are old SATA 1 Raptors; very slow transfer speeds. :( They were free, though, so I wasn't complaining.

 

Nice drives even if a tad yesterday and for most uses speedy enough.Ssd's will be as cheap as chips soon so you will probably get the best bang for the buck of all of us. :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

Well, once I get back to work and pay off all my debts (personal and commercial), I'll build me a really nice system. Of course, that won't be for about 5 years (1.5yrs to pay of personal debts, 3.5 years to pay off commercial - my 5 year plan), by which time SSDs will really be cheap. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...