On 05/07/2019 00:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 04/07/2019 10:46, druck wrote:
>> On 04/07/2019 02:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 03/07/2019 20:20, druck wrote:
>>>> For the Pi, its not the headline large sequential read and write 
>>>> speed that's important, but the 4K random access reads and writes. 
>>>> Theses are vastly faster on an SSD than a hard disk, even with a 
>>>> USB2 interface, and make a lot of difference when used as a boot disk.
>>>>
>>>> Running a big apt update, which does a lot of disc reads and writes, 
>>>> can be 3x to 5x faster with an SSD.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Since it happens in background, who really cares?
>>
>> Well I had credited you with more sense than that, so I can only 
>> assume you are being deliberate argumentative - plonk :(
>>
> 
> What about 'i have a non-critical process running in background,  so I 
> dont care whether it takes ten minutes or 30' do you dnot understand?
> 
> I had credited you with more intelligence..

Whoosh! As usual you've completely missed the point.

The speed of an update is a very good metric for how good your filing 
system is for general use, as it is a particularly file intensive 
operation, doing lots of small read and writes. If apt is 3x to 5x 
quicker, many other common operations will also be faster.

---druck

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05