What would be faster for running Linux on solid state flash memory?

[Link19]

I just bought the Antec Aria case that came with a card reader that supports Compact Flash cards and connects to USB 2.0. I also have a Compact Flash to IDE adapter that I could use to install Linux on. Now assuming my motherboard supports booting from USB 2.0, what would be faster to run Linux on? On the CF to IDE adapter, or in the USB 2.0 card reader?

Help greatly appreciated.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

I'd wager the CF-to-IDE would be easier, as it would be seen as ATA storage and not USB. Throughput will probably be throttled by your card/thumbdrive anyhow.

In either case, use a read-only filesystem setup for your flash-based distro, or face an early death of your card due to massive random-access writes. :Q

- M4H

 

[Zero Plasma]

I would think usb 2.0(if you can do that?)it's has a faster speed then ide if I rember right, but there could be other factors.
IMHO usb 2.0

 

[MobiusPizza]

CF - IDE adaptar basically uses IDE protocol, which I assume would be ATA-100. No performance gain would be received since ATA-100 transfer rate is used through IDE cable. Performance gain would be seen because of the fact that CF card might be able to use full bandwidth of IDE. However IDE is still limited to 100MB/s (or ATA133 but it doesn't have real performance gain), and potentially danger that it saturates the IDE channel and make other HDD slow.

I do not know however whether Compact Flash cards are faster than today's HDD. If they are, it would be definitely faster theoretically to employ CF cards in the card reader which can gain advantage of the USB2.0 (400Mbps bandwidth and lower CPU utilisation than IDE). However this depends on whether the card reader is of good quality.

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: Smoke0
I would think usb 2.0(if you can do that?)it's has a faster speed then ide if I rember right, but there could be other factors.
IMHO usb 2.0

No... USB2.0 is not faster than IDE. Theoretically it might be but actual speeds it falls short.

 

[MobiusPizza]

Originally posted by: JBT

Originally posted by: Smoke0
I would think usb 2.0(if you can do that?)it's has a faster speed then ide if I rember right, but there could be other factors.
IMHO usb 2.0

No... USB2.0 is not faster than IDE. Theoretically it might be but actual speeds it falls short.

I usually find my USB HDD faster than the IDE, may be it's because that my IDE channel is quite saturated with my other HDDs...

 

[n0cmonkey]

The card would have to be in read-only mode. This can be a pain for a system that's logged into frequently. I'm not sure about Linux, but on OpenBSD the easiest way to accomplish this is to make the /dev stuff sit on a ramdisk because it cannot be ro (I've tried, it didn't work 😛).

I've thought about trying it out, but having a real hard drive for data and whatnot, but it's probably a lot more work than I really want to deal with, for too little benefit.

Partitions/Directories that need to be rw (off the top of my head):
/dev
/var
/tmp
/home 😉

 

[Link19]

Anyone else have any ideas as to what would be faster? I know that USB 2.0 is 480 MB/S and IDE is 100 MB/S, but there are other factors that affect overall performance. I'm trying to decide which would be the fastest. I already know that I must make a virtual RAM drive because constant write operatins will kill the CF card. I intend to use this for a Linux NAT routing box.

 

[Zucarita9000]

Originally posted by: Link19
Anyone else have any ideas as to what would be faster? I know that USB 2.0 is 480 MB/S and IDE is 100 MB/S, but there are other factors that affect overall performance. I'm trying to decide which would be the fastest. I already know that I must make a virtual RAM drive because constant write operatins will kill the CF card. I intend to use this for a Linux NAT routing box.

USB 2.0 is 480 Mbps (Mega bits per second). IDE tops out at a theoretical 100MBps (Mega Bytes per second). Not the same.

MBps > Mbps

 

[MercenaryForHire]

You're wasting an Aria on a NAT box? Geez, grab an old P133 from a dumpster or school surplus sale and throw OpenBSD or Smoothwall on it.

- M4H

 

[Link19]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
You're wasting an Aria on a NAT box? Geez, grab an old P133 from a dumpster or school surplus sale and throw OpenBSD or Smoothwall on it.

- M4H

I'm trying to build a solid state, small, fanless system.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
You're wasting an Aria on a NAT box? Geez, grab an old P133 from a dumpster or school surplus sale and throw OpenBSD or Smoothwall on it.

- M4H

I'm trying to build a solid state, small, fanless system.

FlexATX board, fanless Celeron, two PCI NICs, PXE boot to Linux/BSD. 🙂

- M4H