This means that when you transfer a couple of files from a hard drive(s), it will max out the flash-drive’s write speed, and each file will be written slower since they have to share.Īlso, by writing multiple files at the same time, you increase fragmentation because unless the space for the files is fully allocated as soon as the transfer starts, they will end up being broken into chunks as the files are transferred. (The source drive is unlikely to be the bottleneck.) While USB 2.0 can transfer upto 480MBs, your flash-drive is probably limited to ~20MBs. You’ll likely find that your flash-drive’s bandwidth will get saturated pretty easily. You are best off writing a single file at a time.
But should we not use the term latency: latency is head movement + disk rotation delay + read time, and in SSD that is simply random read time and does not depend on the previous read position as disk drives do (*) That is, as nnewton states, because there is no head movement. In HDDs this advised nowadays because, even though there is more than one head in a cylinder, they are not allowed to read nor write concurrently (it has shown no performance impact in real world scenario due to the fact that we can encounter random data in one of the heads that would not allow us to R/W in that head for most of the time being, and if the heads are not completely centered that could lead to disk corruption).Ĭommon sense (and mathematics too!) say that if we have a very very source but we can make the transfer of files in parallel the head seek could (in not many scenarios though) be faster than serialization of the job. Your bottleneck will be on destination disk for sure If destination is anything slower (from a flash with not-so-high-write-rate to a SATA3 HDD to a magnetic tape) you should queue the transfers, one at a time.
If destination disk is an SSD, just keep in mind that SSD's are, for what's in concern here, damn fast.
0 kommentar(er)
