If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
Only if you want to set up to read news groups. Outlook is email only! If
you don't do news groups you don't need Outlook Express. -- Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Desktop Experience "Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Peter Foldes" wrote in message ... Outlook does not work if you don't already have Outlook Express installed. Huh ??? What are you saying. For sure as I am typing this answer Outlook works without having to have Outlook Express. Get your answers straight Tae Song -- Peter Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. For certain, if you install Office XP without Outlook Express on Vista. Outlook will come back with a message saying install Outlook Express. Outlook runs on top of Outlook Express. I was using Windows Live Mail, so I didn't bother. I noticed they released a service pack for Office XP today and by accident I startup Outlook and noticed I could get in. |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
Only if you want to set up to read news groups. Outlook is email only! If
you don't do news groups you don't need Outlook Express. -- Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Desktop Experience "Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Peter Foldes" wrote in message ... Outlook does not work if you don't already have Outlook Express installed. Huh ??? What are you saying. For sure as I am typing this answer Outlook works without having to have Outlook Express. Get your answers straight Tae Song -- Peter Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. For certain, if you install Office XP without Outlook Express on Vista. Outlook will come back with a message saying install Outlook Express. Outlook runs on top of Outlook Express. I was using Windows Live Mail, so I didn't bother. I noticed they released a service pack for Office XP today and by accident I startup Outlook and noticed I could get in. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
On Jun 10, 3:18*pm, "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote:
"Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. Seeing that flash drives are much slower than hard disks, I wonder if your measures have the desired effect. Could we have some performance figures, complete with the test methods you applied so that anyone can perform the same tests on his machine? You have to take in to account access hard drives are mechanical and have access time of ms, where as flash drives have an access time down in to nanoseconds. Try this short paragraph for a starter: "Modern flash drives have USB 2.0 connectivity. However, they do not currently use the full 480 Mbit/s (60MB/s) the USB 2.0 Hi-Speed specification supports due to technical limitations inherent in NAND flash. The fastest drives currently available use a dual channel controller, although they still fall considerably short of the transfer rate possible from a current generation hard disk, or the maximum high speed USB throughput." Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_flash_drive Or this: "A typical "desktop HDD" might store between 120 GB and 2 TB although rarely above 500GB of data (based on US market data[14]) rotate at 5,400 to 10,000 rpm and have a media transfer rate of 1 Gbit/s or higher. Some newer have 3Gbit/s." Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk Now go and do some actual measurements before claiming that your idea will "increase" performance. It won't. Pegasus is right, I think what a lot of you don't understand about flash memory is that it's not access speeds that are fast, it ADRESSING (seek) speeds that are fast. Flash memory is very fast at being able to find data within the chip itself. But there are many more factors than just the addressing speed. First you have the USB port which is only capable of 480 Mbit/s versus today's SATA 3.0 Gbit/ s. And both of those interfaces rarely if not never reach those ideal values. You have to keep in mind that the controller within a USB memory device is a huge limiting factor. The memory itself may be very fast, but the computer isn't talking to that, it's talking to its controller, and if you are using cheap USB sticks, then that controller is very likely to be low quality, and slow. Go google some benchmarks, you'll see that flash memory isn't all that fast. Moving page file and other things away form the OS drive, that I could see having some possible change. If you really want some significant speed increases, check out RAIDing and don't buy cheap RAM, and use a page file, page files do a whole lot more than dealing with minimized programs, there are tons of background applications that don't need to be in memory constantly because they don't do much once they are loaded (software updaters, printer/scanner stuff, etc). |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
On Jun 10, 3:18*pm, "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote:
"Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. Seeing that flash drives are much slower than hard disks, I wonder if your measures have the desired effect. Could we have some performance figures, complete with the test methods you applied so that anyone can perform the same tests on his machine? You have to take in to account access hard drives are mechanical and have access time of ms, where as flash drives have an access time down in to nanoseconds. Try this short paragraph for a starter: "Modern flash drives have USB 2.0 connectivity. However, they do not currently use the full 480 Mbit/s (60MB/s) the USB 2.0 Hi-Speed specification supports due to technical limitations inherent in NAND flash. The fastest drives currently available use a dual channel controller, although they still fall considerably short of the transfer rate possible from a current generation hard disk, or the maximum high speed USB throughput." Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_flash_drive Or this: "A typical "desktop HDD" might store between 120 GB and 2 TB although rarely above 500GB of data (based on US market data[14]) rotate at 5,400 to 10,000 rpm and have a media transfer rate of 1 Gbit/s or higher. Some newer have 3Gbit/s." Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk Now go and do some actual measurements before claiming that your idea will "increase" performance. It won't. Pegasus is right, I think what a lot of you don't understand about flash memory is that it's not access speeds that are fast, it ADRESSING (seek) speeds that are fast. Flash memory is very fast at being able to find data within the chip itself. But there are many more factors than just the addressing speed. First you have the USB port which is only capable of 480 Mbit/s versus today's SATA 3.0 Gbit/ s. And both of those interfaces rarely if not never reach those ideal values. You have to keep in mind that the controller within a USB memory device is a huge limiting factor. The memory itself may be very fast, but the computer isn't talking to that, it's talking to its controller, and if you are using cheap USB sticks, then that controller is very likely to be low quality, and slow. Go google some benchmarks, you'll see that flash memory isn't all that fast. Moving page file and other things away form the OS drive, that I could see having some possible change. If you really want some significant speed increases, check out RAIDing and don't buy cheap RAM, and use a page file, page files do a whole lot more than dealing with minimized programs, there are tons of background applications that don't need to be in memory constantly because they don't do much once they are loaded (software updaters, printer/scanner stuff, etc). |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
Folders and files in %TEMP% can grow to be larger than the total amount of
RAM... On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:10:38 -0700, Jerry wrote: Why not just create and RAMDRIVE and use it for the TMP/TEMP variables? "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. If you have a spare USB flash drive or you are willing to get a cheap say 1GB flash drive. First we plug in the flash drive. Go to Disk Manager and assign it a drive letter, like Z: (this is just to get it out of the way and optional) Go to Advanced system settings, Evironment variables. Change the Temp variable under User to Z:\ (I didn't see any point creating folders, but that's optional) Change the Temp variable under System variable to Z:\ This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. Another trick I tried was moving Windows Search Index to a flash drive, but it won't let me select even a 16GB flash drive. Even though the Index doesn't grow beyond 1GB. It's max size seems to be just under 1GB. You can move to it to a removable drive, though. I rebuilt the Index on an external 500GB USB drive. Again, this cuts down I/O traffic to the internal hard drive. More performance gain. Another idea I tried was creating a pagefile on a 16GB USB flash drive. I found out you can only have 4095MB pagefile or just under 25% of total capacity. I don't know what the rule of thumb is though, because on the internal 1TB hard drive I could create up to the max free space, which was about 700,000GB. Not that I needed that much, but just to test. I'm actually running with 4GB RAM and no page file, at the moment. Even with lots of 100MB picture (scanned documents/photos) open, virtual memory wasn't required. I would like to use most of an 8GB flash drive. Possibly use it for both temp files and virtual memory. I don't know if pagefile is the same thing as running ReadyBoost. I don't think it is, but I will have to look into that. I am not using Readyboost, since I read it doesn't do much good if you have more than 2GB of RAM. Now, if you have a 2nd or 3rd internal hard drive, you can create a pagefile on the 2nd drive and search index on the 3rd or index on 2nd and page file on 3rd. I highly recommended using a USB drive for temp files. 1-2GB are pretty cheap. I don't think you need a larger one unless you are working with full length movies, but I don't for certain. They do something like this on big database servers, some might refer to as "mainframes". The index and database are each on their own storage device. The aggregated bandwidth offers even better performance then RAID and the best part is you can implement it along side with RAID for insane amount of storage I/O performance. Anyways, that's it. If you need more detailed info on setting this up, leave a little note in the newsgroup. If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will help you out. -- Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
Folders and files in %TEMP% can grow to be larger than the total amount of
RAM... On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:10:38 -0700, Jerry wrote: Why not just create and RAMDRIVE and use it for the TMP/TEMP variables? "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. If you have a spare USB flash drive or you are willing to get a cheap say 1GB flash drive. First we plug in the flash drive. Go to Disk Manager and assign it a drive letter, like Z: (this is just to get it out of the way and optional) Go to Advanced system settings, Evironment variables. Change the Temp variable under User to Z:\ (I didn't see any point creating folders, but that's optional) Change the Temp variable under System variable to Z:\ This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. Another trick I tried was moving Windows Search Index to a flash drive, but it won't let me select even a 16GB flash drive. Even though the Index doesn't grow beyond 1GB. It's max size seems to be just under 1GB. You can move to it to a removable drive, though. I rebuilt the Index on an external 500GB USB drive. Again, this cuts down I/O traffic to the internal hard drive. More performance gain. Another idea I tried was creating a pagefile on a 16GB USB flash drive. I found out you can only have 4095MB pagefile or just under 25% of total capacity. I don't know what the rule of thumb is though, because on the internal 1TB hard drive I could create up to the max free space, which was about 700,000GB. Not that I needed that much, but just to test. I'm actually running with 4GB RAM and no page file, at the moment. Even with lots of 100MB picture (scanned documents/photos) open, virtual memory wasn't required. I would like to use most of an 8GB flash drive. Possibly use it for both temp files and virtual memory. I don't know if pagefile is the same thing as running ReadyBoost. I don't think it is, but I will have to look into that. I am not using Readyboost, since I read it doesn't do much good if you have more than 2GB of RAM. Now, if you have a 2nd or 3rd internal hard drive, you can create a pagefile on the 2nd drive and search index on the 3rd or index on 2nd and page file on 3rd. I highly recommended using a USB drive for temp files. 1-2GB are pretty cheap. I don't think you need a larger one unless you are working with full length movies, but I don't for certain. They do something like this on big database servers, some might refer to as "mainframes". The index and database are each on their own storage device. The aggregated bandwidth offers even better performance then RAID and the best part is you can implement it along side with RAID for insane amount of storage I/O performance. Anyways, that's it. If you need more detailed info on setting this up, leave a little note in the newsgroup. If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will help you out. -- Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
Tae Song wrote:
"Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. Seeing that flash drives are much slower than hard disks, I wonder if your measures have the desired effect. Could we have some performance figures, complete with the test methods you applied so that anyone can perform the same tests on his machine? You have to take in to account access hard drives are mechanical and have access time of ms, where as flash drives have an access time down in to nanoseconds. Try this short paragraph for a starter: "Modern flash drives have USB 2.0 connectivity. However, they do not currently use the full 480 Mbit/s (60MB/s) the USB 2.0 Hi-Speed specification supports due to technical limitations inherent in NAND flash. The fastest drives currently available use a dual channel controller, although they still fall considerably short of the transfer rate possible from a current generation hard disk, or the maximum high speed USB throughput." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_flash_drive It says "currently" , but it doesn't say when it was written. Microsoft offers Readyboost, so perhaps things have changed since this was written. The Readyboost cache isn't necessarily faster than the pagefile, random reads are faster on flash drives but sequential reads are faster on hard disks. The Memory Manager will decide which is faster and where to get the cached information. For sequential read and writes USB flash drives are not faster than hard drives, they are much slower. That, along with the other "minor problems" mentioned in your other posts, are reason enough to forget about using this "performance" tweak. John |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
Tae Song wrote:
"Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. Seeing that flash drives are much slower than hard disks, I wonder if your measures have the desired effect. Could we have some performance figures, complete with the test methods you applied so that anyone can perform the same tests on his machine? You have to take in to account access hard drives are mechanical and have access time of ms, where as flash drives have an access time down in to nanoseconds. Try this short paragraph for a starter: "Modern flash drives have USB 2.0 connectivity. However, they do not currently use the full 480 Mbit/s (60MB/s) the USB 2.0 Hi-Speed specification supports due to technical limitations inherent in NAND flash. The fastest drives currently available use a dual channel controller, although they still fall considerably short of the transfer rate possible from a current generation hard disk, or the maximum high speed USB throughput." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_flash_drive It says "currently" , but it doesn't say when it was written. Microsoft offers Readyboost, so perhaps things have changed since this was written. The Readyboost cache isn't necessarily faster than the pagefile, random reads are faster on flash drives but sequential reads are faster on hard disks. The Memory Manager will decide which is faster and where to get the cached information. For sequential read and writes USB flash drives are not faster than hard drives, they are much slower. That, along with the other "minor problems" mentioned in your other posts, are reason enough to forget about using this "performance" tweak. John |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
"propman" wrote in message ... Pegasus [MVP] wrote: "Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. Seeing that flash drives are much slower than hard disks, I wonder if your measures have the desired effect. Could we have some performance figures, complete with the test methods you applied so that anyone can perform the same tests on his machine? You have to take in to account access hard drives are mechanical and have access time of ms, where as flash drives have an access time down in to nanoseconds. Try this short paragraph for a starter: "Modern flash drives have USB 2.0 connectivity. However, they do not currently use the full 480 Mbit/s (60MB/s) the USB 2.0 Hi-Speed specification supports due to technical limitations inherent in NAND flash. The fastest drives currently available use a dual channel controller, although they still fall considerably short of the transfer rate possible from a current generation hard disk, or the maximum high speed USB throughput." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_flash_drive Or this: "A typical "desktop HDD" might store between 120 GB and 2 TB although rarely above 500GB of data (based on US market data[14]) rotate at 5,400 to 10,000 rpm and have a media transfer rate of 1 Gbit/s or higher. Some newer have 3Gbit/s." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk Now go and do some actual measurements before claiming that your idea will "increase" performance. It won't. .....and that information address's [addresses?] the following quote how? quote on This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. quote off Nice words but so far the OP has not offered the slightest evidence that his idea speeds up a machine. Let's see a few tests that anyone can reproduce! |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
"propman" wrote in message ... Pegasus [MVP] wrote: "Tae Song" wrote in message ... "Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. Seeing that flash drives are much slower than hard disks, I wonder if your measures have the desired effect. Could we have some performance figures, complete with the test methods you applied so that anyone can perform the same tests on his machine? You have to take in to account access hard drives are mechanical and have access time of ms, where as flash drives have an access time down in to nanoseconds. Try this short paragraph for a starter: "Modern flash drives have USB 2.0 connectivity. However, they do not currently use the full 480 Mbit/s (60MB/s) the USB 2.0 Hi-Speed specification supports due to technical limitations inherent in NAND flash. The fastest drives currently available use a dual channel controller, although they still fall considerably short of the transfer rate possible from a current generation hard disk, or the maximum high speed USB throughput." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_flash_drive Or this: "A typical "desktop HDD" might store between 120 GB and 2 TB although rarely above 500GB of data (based on US market data[14]) rotate at 5,400 to 10,000 rpm and have a media transfer rate of 1 Gbit/s or higher. Some newer have 3Gbit/s." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk Now go and do some actual measurements before claiming that your idea will "increase" performance. It won't. .....and that information address's [addresses?] the following quote how? quote on This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. quote off Nice words but so far the OP has not offered the slightest evidence that his idea speeds up a machine. Let's see a few tests that anyone can reproduce! |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
"Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. If you have a spare USB flash drive or you are willing to get a cheap say 1GB flash drive. First we plug in the flash drive. Go to Disk Manager and assign it a drive letter, like Z: (this is just to get it out of the way and optional) Go to Advanced system settings, Evironment variables. Change the Temp variable under User to Z:\ (I didn't see any point creating folders, but that's optional) Change the Temp variable under System variable to Z:\ This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. Another trick I tried was moving Windows Search Index to a flash drive, but it won't let me select even a 16GB flash drive. Even though the Index doesn't grow beyond 1GB. It's max size seems to be just under 1GB. You can move to it to a removable drive, though. I rebuilt the Index on an external 500GB USB drive. Again, this cuts down I/O traffic to the internal hard drive. More performance gain. Another idea I tried was creating a pagefile on a 16GB USB flash drive. I found out you can only have 4095MB pagefile or just under 25% of total capacity. I don't know what the rule of thumb is though, because on the internal 1TB hard drive I could create up to the max free space, which was about 700,000GB. Not that I needed that much, but just to test. I'm actually running with 4GB RAM and no page file, at the moment. Even with lots of 100MB picture (scanned documents/photos) open, virtual memory wasn't required. I would like to use most of an 8GB flash drive. Possibly use it for both temp files and virtual memory. I don't know if pagefile is the same thing as running ReadyBoost. I don't think it is, but I will have to look into that. I am not using Readyboost, since I read it doesn't do much good if you have more than 2GB of RAM. Now, if you have a 2nd or 3rd internal hard drive, you can create a pagefile on the 2nd drive and search index on the 3rd or index on 2nd and page file on 3rd. I highly recommended using a USB drive for temp files. 1-2GB are pretty cheap. I don't think you need a larger one unless you are working with full length movies, but I don't for certain. They do something like this on big database servers, some might refer to as "mainframes". The index and database are each on their own storage device. The aggregated bandwidth offers even better performance then RAID and the best part is you can implement it along side with RAID for insane amount of storage I/O performance. Anyways, that's it. If you need more detailed info on setting this up, leave a little note in the newsgroup. If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will help you out. Here is how geniuses work: 1. They have a brilliant idea. 2. They test it. 3. They test it again. 4. They have it verified by someone else. 5. They publish it. 6. They enjoy the praise and the fame. It seems you jumped from Step 1 directly to Step 5, expecting to be showered with praise. Instead you need to scrape a lot of egg off your face. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
"Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. If you have a spare USB flash drive or you are willing to get a cheap say 1GB flash drive. First we plug in the flash drive. Go to Disk Manager and assign it a drive letter, like Z: (this is just to get it out of the way and optional) Go to Advanced system settings, Evironment variables. Change the Temp variable under User to Z:\ (I didn't see any point creating folders, but that's optional) Change the Temp variable under System variable to Z:\ This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. Another trick I tried was moving Windows Search Index to a flash drive, but it won't let me select even a 16GB flash drive. Even though the Index doesn't grow beyond 1GB. It's max size seems to be just under 1GB. You can move to it to a removable drive, though. I rebuilt the Index on an external 500GB USB drive. Again, this cuts down I/O traffic to the internal hard drive. More performance gain. Another idea I tried was creating a pagefile on a 16GB USB flash drive. I found out you can only have 4095MB pagefile or just under 25% of total capacity. I don't know what the rule of thumb is though, because on the internal 1TB hard drive I could create up to the max free space, which was about 700,000GB. Not that I needed that much, but just to test. I'm actually running with 4GB RAM and no page file, at the moment. Even with lots of 100MB picture (scanned documents/photos) open, virtual memory wasn't required. I would like to use most of an 8GB flash drive. Possibly use it for both temp files and virtual memory. I don't know if pagefile is the same thing as running ReadyBoost. I don't think it is, but I will have to look into that. I am not using Readyboost, since I read it doesn't do much good if you have more than 2GB of RAM. Now, if you have a 2nd or 3rd internal hard drive, you can create a pagefile on the 2nd drive and search index on the 3rd or index on 2nd and page file on 3rd. I highly recommended using a USB drive for temp files. 1-2GB are pretty cheap. I don't think you need a larger one unless you are working with full length movies, but I don't for certain. They do something like this on big database servers, some might refer to as "mainframes". The index and database are each on their own storage device. The aggregated bandwidth offers even better performance then RAID and the best part is you can implement it along side with RAID for insane amount of storage I/O performance. Anyways, that's it. If you need more detailed info on setting this up, leave a little note in the newsgroup. If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will help you out. Here is how geniuses work: 1. They have a brilliant idea. 2. They test it. 3. They test it again. 4. They have it verified by someone else. 5. They publish it. 6. They enjoy the praise and the fame. It seems you jumped from Step 1 directly to Step 5, expecting to be showered with praise. Instead you need to scrape a lot of egg off your face. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
"Monitor" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. If you have a spare USB flash drive or you are willing to get a cheap say 1GB flash drive. First we plug in the flash drive. Go to Disk Manager and assign it a drive letter, like Z: (this is just to get it out of the way and optional) Go to Advanced system settings, Evironment variables. Change the Temp variable under User to Z:\ (I didn't see any point creating folders, but that's optional) Change the Temp variable under System variable to Z:\ This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. Another trick I tried was moving Windows Search Index to a flash drive, but it won't let me select even a 16GB flash drive. Even though the Index doesn't grow beyond 1GB. It's max size seems to be just under 1GB. You can move to it to a removable drive, though. I rebuilt the Index on an external 500GB USB drive. Again, this cuts down I/O traffic to the internal hard drive. More performance gain. Another idea I tried was creating a pagefile on a 16GB USB flash drive. I found out you can only have 4095MB pagefile or just under 25% of total capacity. I don't know what the rule of thumb is though, because on the internal 1TB hard drive I could create up to the max free space, which was about 700,000GB. Not that I needed that much, but just to test. I'm actually running with 4GB RAM and no page file, at the moment. Even with lots of 100MB picture (scanned documents/photos) open, virtual memory wasn't required. I would like to use most of an 8GB flash drive. Possibly use it for both temp files and virtual memory. I don't know if pagefile is the same thing as running ReadyBoost. I don't think it is, but I will have to look into that. I am not using Readyboost, since I read it doesn't do much good if you have more than 2GB of RAM. Now, if you have a 2nd or 3rd internal hard drive, you can create a pagefile on the 2nd drive and search index on the 3rd or index on 2nd and page file on 3rd. I highly recommended using a USB drive for temp files. 1-2GB are pretty cheap. I don't think you need a larger one unless you are working with full length movies, but I don't for certain. They do something like this on big database servers, some might refer to as "mainframes". The index and database are each on their own storage device. The aggregated bandwidth offers even better performance then RAID and the best part is you can implement it along side with RAID for insane amount of storage I/O performance. Anyways, that's it. If you need more detailed info on setting this up, leave a little note in the newsgroup. If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will help you out. Here is how geniuses work: 1. They have a brilliant idea. 2. They test it. 3. They test it again. 4. They have it verified by someone else. 5. They publish it. 6. They enjoy the praise and the fame. It seems you jumped from Step 1 directly to Step 5, expecting to be showered with praise. Instead you need to scrape a lot of egg off your face. Thank you, I thought it was good idea too. I never expected praise, I just thought it was an idea worth trying out. I never claim to be a genius, but thanks for the benefit of the doubt. I eat eggs breakfast... so I can live with it. Here is another idea, I don't know if anyone thought of it before... How about Windows support for MAID (massive array of inexpensive drives) using USB flash drives. Would that be cool or what? |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
"Monitor" wrote in message ... "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. If you have a spare USB flash drive or you are willing to get a cheap say 1GB flash drive. First we plug in the flash drive. Go to Disk Manager and assign it a drive letter, like Z: (this is just to get it out of the way and optional) Go to Advanced system settings, Evironment variables. Change the Temp variable under User to Z:\ (I didn't see any point creating folders, but that's optional) Change the Temp variable under System variable to Z:\ This will cut down on I/O traffic to the hard drive. Starting an app like Word, would cause the HD to read the program into memory while at the same time writing into the drive, temporary files. This causes an I/O queue to form and degrade Windows performance. By off loading some of the I/O traffic to another storage device, the hard drive read/write head doesn't have to move around as much either. All performance gains. Another trick I tried was moving Windows Search Index to a flash drive, but it won't let me select even a 16GB flash drive. Even though the Index doesn't grow beyond 1GB. It's max size seems to be just under 1GB. You can move to it to a removable drive, though. I rebuilt the Index on an external 500GB USB drive. Again, this cuts down I/O traffic to the internal hard drive. More performance gain. Another idea I tried was creating a pagefile on a 16GB USB flash drive. I found out you can only have 4095MB pagefile or just under 25% of total capacity. I don't know what the rule of thumb is though, because on the internal 1TB hard drive I could create up to the max free space, which was about 700,000GB. Not that I needed that much, but just to test. I'm actually running with 4GB RAM and no page file, at the moment. Even with lots of 100MB picture (scanned documents/photos) open, virtual memory wasn't required. I would like to use most of an 8GB flash drive. Possibly use it for both temp files and virtual memory. I don't know if pagefile is the same thing as running ReadyBoost. I don't think it is, but I will have to look into that. I am not using Readyboost, since I read it doesn't do much good if you have more than 2GB of RAM. Now, if you have a 2nd or 3rd internal hard drive, you can create a pagefile on the 2nd drive and search index on the 3rd or index on 2nd and page file on 3rd. I highly recommended using a USB drive for temp files. 1-2GB are pretty cheap. I don't think you need a larger one unless you are working with full length movies, but I don't for certain. They do something like this on big database servers, some might refer to as "mainframes". The index and database are each on their own storage device. The aggregated bandwidth offers even better performance then RAID and the best part is you can implement it along side with RAID for insane amount of storage I/O performance. Anyways, that's it. If you need more detailed info on setting this up, leave a little note in the newsgroup. If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will help you out. Here is how geniuses work: 1. They have a brilliant idea. 2. They test it. 3. They test it again. 4. They have it verified by someone else. 5. They publish it. 6. They enjoy the praise and the fame. It seems you jumped from Step 1 directly to Step 5, expecting to be showered with praise. Instead you need to scrape a lot of egg off your face. Thank you, I thought it was good idea too. I never expected praise, I just thought it was an idea worth trying out. I never claim to be a genius, but thanks for the benefit of the doubt. I eat eggs breakfast... so I can live with it. Here is another idea, I don't know if anyone thought of it before... How about Windows support for MAID (massive array of inexpensive drives) using USB flash drives. Would that be cool or what? |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
How to increase system system performance
Hi, Tae Song.
Most of your posts in other threads sound intelligent. And this thread started off sounding like a possibly good idea. But then, in your third post, you said this: "I started up Outlook (which today's service pack for Office XP fixed. In Office XP, Outlook does not work if you don't already have Outlook Express installed. It hadn't worked till early today after the latest update. I never installed Outlook Express on this Vista system.)" That paragraph lost all your credibility for me. :( First, of course, "Outlook does not work if you don't already have Outlook Express" is an obviously false claim, because many of us are running Outlook in Vista and Win7 RC. And then you said, "I never installed Outlook Express on this Vista system." This indicates a serious lack of knowledge of both OE and Vista, because OE cannot be installed on Vista. At that point, I turned you off and read the rest of the thread just to see how far you would go and whether others would correct your errors. :( I'm glad to see that several knowledgeable readers did. RC -- R. C. White, CPA San Marcos, TX Microsoft Windows MVP Windows Live Mail 2009 (14.0.8064.0206) in Win7 Ultimate x64 RC 7100 "Tae Song" wrote in message ... I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost Windows performance. SNIP long cross-posted post full of inaccurate information and advice If you need more detailed info on setting this up, leave a little note in the newsgroup. If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will help you out. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|