Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
my harddrive performance is sucking
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
volospin
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 06 Aug 2002
Posts: 156
Location: Hong Kong

PostPosted: Tue Apr 29, 2003 2:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ehh... Bloody Bastard...
I said and mean the timing buffer-cache reads...
not the timing buffered disk reads...
does it mean my cache is slow or something?

Since the following appears, or how do I increase above my 116MB/sec

moonshade wrote:
60 Gb Maxtor 6Y060L0, i845G chipset
Code:

/dev/hda:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  0.28 seconds =457.14 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  1.36 seconds = 47.58 MB/sec

:D

_________________
PIII-S 1.4G / 512MB / TUSL2-M / 3C920 x 2 / Seagate Barracuda IV 40GB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bzugda
n00b
n00b


Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 39
Location: Barnsley

PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bloody Bastard wrote:
AFAIK, there is no IDE hard drive that can do 400MB/sec :)


I know it's an old post but I couldn't resist rising to that statement :)

Code:

rogue root # hdparm -tT /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   1452 MB in  2.00 seconds = 726.00 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  138 MB in  3.01 seconds =  45.79 MB/sec


Although, tbh the reason I'm here is 'cos everything goes to shit when I run "updatedb" :(

Volospin, I would've thought the cache read was (perhaps obviously) a property of the amount of cache your drive has though I'm pretty sure mines only 2mb
_________________
I'm too short for this shit
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sylgeist
n00b
n00b


Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Posts: 36
Location: USA

PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2003 10:52 pm    Post subject: Am I maxed out performance-wise? Reply with quote

I am getting 116.xx for the buffer and 38.xx for the disk amounts. I know that is not bad but I have two drives in my machine - both Western Digital, one is a special edition with 8MB cache and the other is a 2MB version. I get exactly the same numbers every time. On my other machine with the exact same drives (but different chipset) I get 900MB on buffer score and 45 on disk. Am I maxed out on my VIA chipset for speed? Why is the 8MB cache not giving better results?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AnvilDemon
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jul 2003
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Am I maxed out performance-wise? Reply with quote

Sylgeist wrote:
I am getting 116.xx for the buffer and 38.xx for the disk amounts. I know that is not bad but I have two drives in my machine - both Western Digital, one is a special edition with 8MB cache and the other is a 2MB version. I get exactly the same numbers every time. On my other machine with the exact same drives (but different chipset) I get 900MB on buffer score and 45 on disk. Am I maxed out on my VIA chipset for speed? Why is the 8MB cache not giving better results?


Could be the program is using a file size that will fit in the 2MB cache and since it uses the same file size for 8MB cache it is only effected by the latency of the cache.
If you tested with a file that is bigger than 2MB you would see your difference immediately as the 2MB cache HDD would not be able to put the info into the cache. It would have to break up the info or file occordingly. If I use a file that is 15MB in size and pull it from the HDDto another HDD then the 2MB cache drive would have to break the file into 8 different sections during the transfer. With the 8MB cache drive it would only have to break it up 2 times. So the 8MB drive can send the file much faster overall as long as the size is larger and not smaller than the 2MB drive's cache.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sylgeist
n00b
n00b


Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Posts: 36
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the info - that makes sense, but why the big difference between my two machines?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AnvilDemon
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jul 2003
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sylgeist wrote:
Thanks for the info - that makes sense, but why the big difference between my two machines?


The only thing I can think of is driver optimizations. Or the throughput of the chipset is at it's max for the Via.

What is the other chipset you are using?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ang
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2003 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Code:

hdparm -Tt /dev/md7
 
/dev/md7:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   1112 MB in  2.00 seconds = 554.61 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  132 MB in  3.00 seconds =  43.93 MB/sec

I got these results on an AMD2k, w 512MB ram on via kt400 w. Highpoint 20276 controller w 2 60GB Maxtor 6Y060L0 hdds in SOFTWARE RAID 1.
Code:

PDC20276: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 78
PDC20276: chipset revision 1
PDC20276: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
PDC20276: (U)DMA Burst Bit ENABLED Primary MASTER Mode Secondary MASTER Mode.
    ide2: BM-DMA at 0xd400-0xd407, BIOS settings: hde:pio, hdf:pio
    ide3: BM-DMA at 0xd408-0xd40f, BIOS settings: hdg:pio, hdh:pio
VP_IDE: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 89
PCI: No IRQ known for interrupt pin A of device 00:11.1 - using IRQ 255
VP_IDE: chipset revision 6
VP_IDE: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with idebus=xx
VP_IDE: VIA vt8235 (rev 00) IDE UDMA133 controller on pci00:11.1
    ide0: BM-DMA at 0xe400-0xe407, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:pio
    ide1: BM-DMA at 0xe408-0xe40f, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:pio
hda: Maxtor 6Y060L0, ATA DISK drive
hdc: TEAC CD-W552E, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive
hdg: Maxtor 6Y060L0, ATA DISK drive

following some good instructions from

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=51&highlight=hdparm
and
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=8813&highlight=software+raid+install

Code:

/etc/conf.d/local.start
hdparm -qc 1 -qd 1 -qk 1 -qX 70 /dev/hda
hdparm -qc 1 -qd 1 -qk 1 -qX 70 /dev/hdg


The trick is to put the two drives of the raid 1 on separate ide controllers:

/dev/hda utilises the on-board ide controller, whereas /dev/hdg is on the highpoint controller.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
drekka
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 111

PostPosted: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello everyone, read this thread with interest and thought I might ask your oinions on why I can't run higher than 25M/sec stable. I can get 41M/sec but the system crashses within a minute or two with lots of IO errors.

Asus A7N8X Deluxe with Sil3112 SATA raid controller.
2 x Seagate 120G SATA drives in raid 0.

ac-sources kernel.

hdparm gives:

Timing buffer-cache reads: 1612 MB in 2.00 seconds = 806.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 76 MB in 3.00 seconds = 25.33 MB/sec

Boot up hdparm settings are :

disc0_args="-c1 -A1 -d1 -X70 -m16 -u1"
disc1_args="-c1 -A1 -d1 -X70 -m16 -u1"

I've used the max_kb_per_request trick to get to 41M/sec, but as I said it was not stable. The default setting for these drives is 15, which is the setting everyone recommends. I had to go higher to 24 or greater to get faster speeds.

Any thoughts,
Derek.
_________________
Regards,
Derek

<nb>Reality is not what you think</nb>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AnvilDemon
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jul 2003
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

drekka, I have two raptors. They used to be in a raid 0 but not anymore. I used the -d1 and -X70 command only. I have the Abit NF7-S with the silraid controller, same as you. My system seemed stable for about two weeks then one day it just locked up and I lost everything. So now I use the drives independent on the controller with the same settings and I have not had a problem yet.

I know this does not help much but atleast it is some information.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vbenares
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 13 Aug 2003
Posts: 205

PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay. Try and explain these numbers:

Timing buffer-cache reads: 1668 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 3.1 MB/sec

What the heck is going on?! And how do I fix it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vbenares
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 13 Aug 2003
Posts: 205

PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I should have mentioned, it's a Seagate 80 GB, 7200 RPM, Serial ATA, w/ 8 MB Cache. Model number ST380023AS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lamaistres
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 17 Dec 2002
Posts: 268
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Check this out:

# hdparm -T /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 688 MB in 2.01 seconds = 342.29 MB/sec

hdparm -t /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
Timing buffered disk reads: 96 MB in 3.04 seconds = 31.63 MB/sec

using "hdparm -X68 -m16 -u1 -c1 -a64 /dev/hda"

688 MB in 2.01 seconds?
_________________
"Always do what you want, and say what you feel,
because those who mind don't matter, and those
who matter don't mind." -- Dr. Suess
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TobiWan
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 275
Location: Brussels, Old Europe

PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:06 pm    Post subject: hdparm guide Reply with quote

This thread really is interesting. That whole hdparm issue should be included in the installation manual at least for setting the dma and keep that when rebooting.

Maybe we can collect a couble of good hdparm settings for different purposes like:


    a device running a root partition with the system, applications and the swap file
    a device holding a grand collection of medium sized files like mp3 or jpg which get accessed a lot
    a device holding a mysql or any other database


I guess you get my point here. Make some more propositions and we can start collecting settings. I am even willing to write a hdparm summary afterwards and translate it into German and Dutch. Maybe French too if there's enough people interested in that language. :-)

Tobias
_________________
Killing for peace is like fucking for virginity.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1317
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey guys (and the few girls, there nees to be more girls here) , sorry but people in this thread should be able to help me with my problem it's similar ,but no it's not an unsearched simple thing (i hope to jebus it was though)

anyway details here

hopefully you can help me out, sorry for posing this type of thing but my comps goin a little slow because of it.


Last edited by viperlin on Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:25 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TobiWan
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 275
Location: Brussels, Old Europe

PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:16 pm    Post subject: no offense meant Reply with quote

viperlin wrote:
hey, sorry but people in this thread should be able to help me with my problem, no it's not an unsearched simple thing (i hope to jebus it was though)


Sorry 8O

I didn't want to steal away any attention towards your problem. I just thought this thread might be the right place to collect what's being written here concerning the ideal settings for hdparm. No offense meant. Really. :oops:

cheers,
Tobias
_________________
Killing for peace is like fucking for virginity.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperlin
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 1317
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

erm u missunderstood it, i'm just trying to attract attention to my thread for help, since it's a chipset hdparm problem, darn chipsets, why cant it be hamster powered
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fdavid
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 27 Apr 2003
Posts: 82
Location: Graz, Austria, EU

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a Quantum lct20 20G (ATA100, 5400rpm), and a Samsung SP P80 80G (ATA133, 7200rpm). My mainboard supports ATA100. On the ide channel of th Quantum there is also a CD-writer configured as slave.

hdparm recognizes the Samsung running in udma5, the Quantum running in udma2. When i disconnect the cd-writer the Quantum runs in udma5, as well.

So, here are my hdparm results:
Samsung (udma5):
-t: 53.78; 53.33; 54.24
-T: 124.27; 123.08; 125.49
Quantum (udma2 /cd-writer connected/):
-t: 18.99; 20.25; 19.88
-T: 120.75; 129.29; 129.29
Quantum (udma5 /cd-writer disconnected/):
-t: 17.07; 20.45; 20.38
-T: 110.24; 113.27; 115.32

Questions:
1. Why don't i measure significant difference between udma2 and udma5 in case of Quantum? Is it just because the values stay under approx. 33 (udma2)? How could i measure the performance difference if there's some?
2. Could be such a big performance defference between two disks running in udma5?
3. AFAIK the -T option doesn't really count, because it measures the speed of the linux memory cache, not hte disk memory cache. It has more likely sg to do with the RAM speed, but the disk speed. Is that right? (My measurements seem to prove this, i think so.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jung, Dong Chul
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 1
Location: Korea

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 11:03 pm    Post subject: hdparm Reply with quote

My System
P4 2.53GHz
IC35L120AVV207-1 [8MB]

zzori nvidia-glx # hdparm -vtT /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
multcount = 16 (on)
IO_support = 0 (default 16-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 256 (on)
geometry = 16383/255/63, sectors = 241254720, start = 0
Timing buffer-cache reads: 1952 MB in 2.00 seconds = 975.17 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 152 MB in 3.01 seconds = 50.44 MB/sec

zzori nvidia-glx # hdparm -vtT /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
multcount = 16 (on)
IO_support = 0 (default 16-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 256 (on)
geometry = 16383/255/63, sectors = 241254720, start = 0
Timing buffer-cache reads: 1896 MB in 2.00 seconds = 948.14 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 158 MB in 3.00 seconds = 52.66 MB/sec
zzori nvidia-glx #
_________________
ZZORI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ikaro
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 2526
Location: Denmark

PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

my drive is a Maxtor 120gb ata 133 , 7200 rpm , 2mb cache.

ive done this a long time ago, so i dont remember the old speeds, but this is what i got now:

Code:

/dev/hda:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   1260 MB in  2.00 seconds = 630.00 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  144 MB in  3.03 seconds =  47.52 MB/sec


settings are :
Code:

hdparm -X 70 -c1 -d1 -u1 /dev/hda


:)
_________________
linux: #232767
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
insanethrees
n00b
n00b


Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 10
Location: Seattle, USA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 05, 2003 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

squanto wrote:
Can anyone beat my 45.98MB / sec? just curious. I run ReiserFS with notail on my WD special edition, on Epox 8KHA+ board. :?:


Since you ask, the 200GB WD SE is getting 53.3MB/sec on the Promise PCI card that it comes with. According to the people at storagereview.com, bigger disks of the same model are always slightly faster, but I can't remember why.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
j_c_p
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 296
Location: France - Colmar

PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2003 1:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,
Quote:
bash-2.05b# hdparm -tT /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 980 MB in 2.00 seconds = 490.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 172 MB in 3.01 seconds = 57.14 MB/sec

I have 40 Go Maxtor DM+8 HDD on promise pdc 20276 (not in raid mode), but
Quote:
bash-2.05b# hdparm -i /dev/hda

/dev/hda:

Model=Maxtor 6E040L0, FwRev=NAR61590, SerialNo=E14L6V8E
Config={ Fixed }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=57
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=2048kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=4047/16/255, CurSects=16511760, LBA=yes, LBAsects=80293248
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2
AdvancedPM=yes: disabled (255) WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: (null):

* signifies the current active mode

don't give me UDMA mode 6, why ?
Quote:
bash-2.05b# lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8366/A/7 [Apollo KT266/A/333]
00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8366/A/7 [Apollo KT266/A/333 AGP]
00:06.0 Ethernet controller: 3Com Corporation 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] (rev 78)
00:0b.0 USB Controller: NEC Corporation USB (rev 41)
00:0b.1 USB Controller: NEC Corporation USB (rev 41)
00:0b.2 USB Controller: NEC Corporation USB 2.0 (rev 02)
00:0c.0 RAID bus controller: Promise Technology, Inc. PDC20276 IDE (rev 01)
00:11.0 ISA bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8233A ISA Bridge
00:11.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT8233/A/C/VT8235 PIPC Bus Master IDE (rev 06)
00:11.2 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 23)
00:11.3 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 23)
00:11.5 Multimedia audio controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8233/A/8235 AC97 Audio Controller (rev 40)
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon R200 QL [Radeon 8500 LE]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zebbedi
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 91

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a WD 160GB UIDE 8MB Cache and performance seemed rather lacking under linux compared to windows. WD also seem to be rather scared when you ask their tech support about running linux on the drive, but heres my results.

With just "hdparm -d /dev/hda" i get:

/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 1772 MB in 2.00 seconds = 886.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 10 MB in 3.40 seconds = 2.94 MB/sec

Then with "hdparm -m16 -c1 -d1 -u1 -k1 -X69 /dev/hda" i get:

/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 1804 MB in 2.00 seconds = 902.00 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 160 MB in 3.02 seconds = 52.98 MB/sec


Needless to say i added those lines to my hdparm config file and ran rc-update :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Spida
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 08 Feb 2003
Posts: 97
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why are you all using hdparm to benchmark your drives? bonnie++ is said to deliver much more reliable results.
-> HDD Benchmarking Thread
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grzewho
l33t
l33t


Joined: 31 Dec 2002
Posts: 626
Location: /home/g

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2003 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

can someone explain me the usage of -A1 , -a64 and -c3 options?
_________________
Code:
USE="freedom -software_patents" emerge --deep --update world
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrDooM
n00b
n00b


Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 69

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2003 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hdparm -i /dev/hde

/dev/hde:

Model=WDC WD600BB-00CAA1, FwRev=17.07W17, SerialNo=WD-WMA8F1124538
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec SpinMotCtl Fixed DTR>5Mbs FmtGapReq }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=57600, SectSize=600, ECCbytes=40
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=2048kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=4
CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=117231408
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: device does not report version:

* signifies the current active mode


hdparm -i /dev/hdg

/dev/hdg:

Model=WDC WD600BB-00CAA1, FwRev=17.07W17, SerialNo=WD-WMA8F1123163
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec SpinMotCtl Fixed DTR>5Mbs FmtGapReq }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=57600, SectSize=600, ECCbytes=40
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=2048kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=4
CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=117231408
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: device does not report version:

* signifies the current active mode


hdparm -tT /dev/md0

/dev/md0:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 692 MB in 2.01 seconds = 343.99 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 116 MB in 3.00 seconds = 38.65 MB/sec

Linux Software Raid 1


MrDooM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 5 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum