about my plots
-
I : 11682068578610233358_900000001_5722200_5722200
J : 11682068578610233358_1000000001_5722200_5722200
M : 11682068578610233358_1300000001_7627176_7627176
N : 11682068578610233358_1400000001_3808784_3808784
O : 11682068578610233358_1200000001_5713560_5713560
Q : 11682068578610233358_1700000001_5722096_5722096
R : 11682068578610233358_1600000001_7629848_7629848
S : 11682068578610233358_1900000001_11444992_11444992
U : 11682068578610233358_2100000001_7627176_7627176
V : 11682068578610233358_1100000001_11444992_11444992
W : 11682068578610233358_2300000001_11444992_11444992
X : 11682068578610233358_2400000001_7629848_7629848
Y : 11682068578610233358_2500000001_7629848_7629848
Z : 11682068578610233358_2600000001_7629848_7629848
K : 11682068578610233358_1500000001_7629848_7629848
this is a list of my plotted external disks.now i'm wondering if the 2e part of numbers should follow in sequence going from hd to hd
so 1e hd 900...1
2e hd 1000....1
3e hd 11000....1 and so on so there wouldnt be any gaps in the listjust asking because those 15 (14 and 1 being plotted) hd take a good 120s to be all read in and if that number order would maybe reduce that time a bit or if it doesnt matter at all ?
-
@nightwolf It's only the total capacity that matters, gaps between drives does not make a difference.
-
i'm glad to read that...........now i'm working on the readspead to go down......i got it down to 108 seconds to read 30 tb
