All the better, although if you are using KDE-4.x.x I would also recommend a KDE-3.5.10 or Gnome live CD, in case there are some desktop aspects impacting this (although given you did not see the drive with fdisk, I doubt this is desktop related). I typically recommend sidux as a good live CD for hardware detection.
Most of my external drives are a mix of Seagate/Maxtors.
Daisy chaining works like a charm with my Seagate and Maxtors with firewire and openSUSE-11.1. In fact, it worked in 11.0, 10.3, 10.2, 10.1, 10.0, and 9.3, albeit we were only talking 2 daisy chained firewire drives with 9.3 as opposed to 5 now. This was all with KDE3. However hot plug automounting has not always worked for NTFS. With the earlier SuSE versions I had to manually mount.
I attached the same drive to a different machine, also running openSUSE 11.1. Hot-plugged. Worked with no problem, and Dolphin sees all the partitions.
[08:48:24 /etc]> lsmod|grep 1394
ohci1394 27652 1
ieee1394 83764 2 sbp2,ohci1394
[08:50:02 /etc]> cat fstab
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD800JB-00CRA1_WD-WMA8E4523913-part5 swap swap defaults 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD800JB-00CRA1_WD-WMA8E4523913-part6 / ext3 acl,user_xattr 1 1
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD800JB-00CRA1_WD-WMA8E4523913-part4 /home ext3 acl,user_xattr 1 2
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part2 /windows/C ntfs-3g users,gid=users,fmask=133,dmask=022,locale=en_US.UTF-8 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part5 /windows/D vfat users,gid=users,umask=0002,utf8=true 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part6 /windows/E vfat users,gid=users,umask=0002,utf8=true 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part7 /windows/F vfat users,gid=users,umask=0002,utf8=true 0 0
proc /proc proc defaults 0 0
sysfs /sys sysfs noauto 0 0
debugfs /sys/kernel/debug debugfs noauto 0 0
usbfs /proc/bus/usb usbfs noauto 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts mode=0620,gid=5 0 0
[08:50:23 /etc]> su -c 'fdisk -l'
Password:
Disk /dev/sda: 80.0 GB, 80000000000 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9726 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x41172ba5
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 1 4 32098+ de Dell Utility
/dev/sda2 * 5 4339 34820887+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sda3 4340 9725 43263045 f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sda5 4340 6379 16386268+ b W95 FAT32
/dev/sda6 6380 8419 16386268+ b W95 FAT32
/dev/sda7 8420 9725 10490413+ b W95 FAT32
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x8994df3d
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 1 5568 44724928+ f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sdb4 5569 9729 33423232+ 83 Linux
/dev/sdb5 1 96 771057 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/sdb6 97 2292 17639338+ 83 Linux
/dev/sdb7 2293 5568 26314438+ 83 Linux
Disk /dev/sdg: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x8d399bc0
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdg1 1 12238 98301703+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdg2 12239 24476 98301735 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdg3 24477 36714 98301735 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdg4 36715 60801 193478827+ f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sdg5 36715 44743 64492911 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdg6 44744 52772 64492911 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdg7 52773 60801 64492911 7 HPFS/NTFS
[08:51:17 /etc]>
This machine is an old Dell Intel 32-bit tower; 6-pin sockets. The problem machine is a 3- or 4-year-old HP AMD 64-bit laptop (with 64-bit SUSE); 4-pin socket. The drive has 6-pin sockets.
When I backed up the laptop before installing SUSE the Firewire transfer speed was about 0.75GB/minute. Is that reasonable?
What is interesting there is it suggests the drive is fine (which you pretty much confirmed already by your MS-Windoze successful use) and that it works under a different openSUSE version. In both cases are you running the same desktop ? … and the only important difference that you can think of is (1) different PC hardware and (2) one PC uses 32-bit openSUSE-11.1 and the other 64-bit openSUSE-11.1 ?
I’m not at my Linux PC(s) setup now, so I can’t comment much on speed. And even IF I was at my Linux PC, I don’t know what would make a good speed test for firewire. I do recall my data transfers are very quick, and that the amount of RAM adds a degree of “confusion” to the reported transfer speed. My Intel Core i7 920 w/6GB of RAM is very disceptive, as it appears a massive amount of data is cached during the transfer and so its difficult to determine the actual transfer speed.
I found it intersting that you were successful with so many partitions. During the above test of yours, I noted 3 hard drives with a combined 5 primary partitions, 3 extended partitions, and 10 logical partitions for a total of 18 partitions (of which 15 directly contain files). I’m puzzling how the libata limitation of 15 partitions applies here. … Is the libata 15 partition limitation drive specific only ? or is it Linux operating system specific ? … and does it only apply to logical and primary partitions ? or does it include extended partitions when one is counting to see how many partitions relevant to libata’s limitation one has in one’s system ?
I did wonder about your previous comment on number of partitions.
I’ve been in the habit of using a lot of partitions ever since I actually had a hard-drive, circa 1983. It was a 10MB SCSI Maxtor. I still have it somewhere. I can remember running at least 20 partitions on OS/2 when it first came out, and even on a Windoze machine that was all my employer would allow me to use. :’(
I find it a good way to separate different sets of data and software, and easier to handle than folders alone. It’s a state of mind, I guess. I’ve a feeling that it might have given slightly better performance then as well, on the hard-drive technology of the time, but I don’t know for sure. I hear the opposite is true now, if anything, but again I have no proof.
So I was amazed when you came up with such a low limit for the number of partitions usable on Linux. How does that work for networked drives? I’d’ve thought that Linux could handle a lot more, in fact, not being limited by alphabetical partition/drive identifiers (like C: ) in Windows. Interesting.
Yes – both machines have KDE, and they’re running different SUSE versions, 32-bit and 64-bit, both 11.1.
When the use of libata was proposed, there was some debate on it, as it was noted it would impact users who liked to use a large number of partitions. …
Again, I do not know if the 15 is a libata limitation per drive, or if the 15 is a libata limiation per operating system.
I just rebooted, with both drives connected and powered on. Only WD1 shows in Dolphin, missing one Primary partition (it was there before I rebooted). Same in Konqueror.
Here’s the usual scene-of-the-crime report. Note that /dev/sde is WD2 – the one that’s invisible to both Dolphin and Konqueror.
[16:47:49 /etc]> lsmod|grep 1394
ohci1394 27652 1
ieee1394 83764 2 sbp2,ohci1394
[16:48:51 /etc]> cat fstab
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD800JB-00CRA1_WD-WMA8E4523913-part5 swap swap defaults 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD800JB-00CRA1_WD-WMA8E4523913-part6 / ext3 acl,user_xattr 1 1
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD800JB-00CRA1_WD-WMA8E4523913-part4 /home ext3 acl,user_xattr 1 2
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part2 /windows/C ntfs-3g users,gid=users,fmask=133,dmask=022,locale=en_US.UTF-8 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part5 /windows/D vfat users,gid=users,umask=0002,utf8=true 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part6 /windows/E vfat users,gid=users,umask=0002,utf8=true 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-IC35L080AVVA07-0_VNC404A4H20M9F-part7 /windows/F vfat users,gid=users,umask=0002,utf8=true 0 0
proc /proc proc defaults 0 0
sysfs /sys sysfs noauto 0 0
debugfs /sys/kernel/debug debugfs noauto 0 0
usbfs /proc/bus/usb usbfs noauto 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts mode=0620,gid=5 0 0
[16:49:11 /etc]> su -c 'fdisk -l'
Password:
Disk /dev/sda: 80.0 GB, 80000000000 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9726 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x41172ba5
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 1 4 32098+ de Dell Utility
/dev/sda2 * 5 4339 34820887+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sda3 4340 9725 43263045 f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sda5 4340 6379 16386268+ b W95 FAT32
/dev/sda6 6380 8419 16386268+ b W95 FAT32
/dev/sda7 8420 9725 10490413+ b W95 FAT32
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x8994df3d
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 1 5568 44724928+ f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sdb4 5569 9729 33423232+ 83 Linux
/dev/sdb5 1 96 771057 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/sdb6 97 2292 17639338+ 83 Linux
/dev/sdb7 2293 5568 26314438+ 83 Linux
Disk /dev/sde: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x3646cb0a
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sde1 * 1 60801 488384001 b W95 FAT32
Disk /dev/sdh: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x8d399bc0
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdh1 1 12238 98301703+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdh2 12239 24476 98301735 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdh3 24477 36714 98301735 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdh4 36715 60801 193478827+ f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sdh5 36715 44743 64492911 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdh6 44744 52772 64492911 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdh7 52773 60801 64492911 7 HPFS/NTFS
[16:50:02 /etc]>
I haven’t officially reported this as a bug because I’ve been unable to reliably replicate the problem. It seems to be a moving target. If nobody reports something similar I guess I’ll blame dæmonic intervention. Again.
Transfer Speed Department: Using the command su -c 'hdparm -t /dev/sdx**’** I notice that Firewire performance is not all that much better than USB on the two machines I’ve tried it on (with the same external HDD). This is vanilla Firewire 400 and USB 2.0, averages of four runs.
Machine 1: USB 27 MB/s; Firewire 30 MB/s
Machine 2: USB 20 MB/s; Firewire 23 MB/s
I know it’s a crude test, but surely indicative of something?
I’m waiting until Firewire 800 cards get a bit cheaper before I invest. Is it really twice as fast?
[One of the machines has USB1 as well. That delivers less than 1MB/s for the same test.]