[Ardour-Users] disk not able to keep up with ardour...

John Rigg au at sound-man.co.uk
Thu Dec 6 09:01:10 PST 2007

On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 09:06:09AM -0500, maillistnoll wrote:
> I'm having trouble with my disks keeping up with Ardour. I remembered
> reading this thread a while back and I've searched through some of the other
> FAQs and mailing lists, but can't seem to come to any particular conclusion.
> I have a 3GHz HT Intel system (Dell) with a set of mirrored Seagate SATA
> drives.
> Unlike the previous discussion, though, I am having trouble just getting 3-4
> minutes of 3 mono tracks to record at 44.1KHz from a Delta 1010. I've run
> Bonnie to test performance (approx. 4MB/sec if I remember correctly) and I
> believe it should be more than sufficient, though not optimal. I've been
> focusing on the IO scheduler as a possible culprit, but none of the FAQs and
> other info that I've found can seem to come to any consensus whether to use
> the AS, CFQ, or Deadline schedulers. My default is the AS.

3 mono tracks at 44.1kHz is less than 600 kB/sec. What does that 4MB/sec
performance figure refer to? If I use `hdparm -tT /dev/hdc' on my 80GB
ATA133 drive (which is /dev/hdc on my system) it reports over 50MB/sec
for buffered disk reads.


More information about the Ardour-Users mailing list