> So why would switching to an SSD slow hibernation times? Frankly I can't
> think of any reasons (comparing apples to apples) why a faster drive
> should lead to slower performance. Possibly it's an interface issue -
> the SSD's controller is getting swamped - while the HDD the poster had
> been using was able to handle a faster continuous write.
Maybe the alignment of the swap partition is off? SSD react very badly
if you don't align your partitions to their erase block size. This is
why I always recommend to align them to 1MB boundaries as most SSDs
available today seem to have erase block sizes in the 64KB to 512KB
range.
Grüße,
Sven.
--
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: d92ap133nov8@mids.svenhartge.de">http://lists.debian.org/d92ap133nov8@mids.svenhartge.de
So alignment and trimming should be check. Maybe also a look at the logs
to spot possible IO/FS errors …
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1345822946.21543.1.camel@p76-nom-gd.cnrs-imn.fr">http://lists.debian.org/1345822946.21543.1.camel@p76-nom-gd.cnrs-imn.fr
Maybe the alignment of the swap partition is off? SSD react very badly
if you don't align your partitions to their erase block size. This is
why I always recommend to align them to 1MB boundaries as most SSDs
available today seem to have erase block sizes in the 64KB to 512KB
range.
So alignment and trimming should be check. Maybe also a look at the logs
to spot possible IO/FS errors …
Let me look into that. Thanks!
Hugo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
hibernate: swap on SSD = not fast
