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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
now using a small ramdisk
Farstones ram disk.
I am curious, I have put the temp folder in a ram disk and I think it is rendering that is now taking place much faster and the screensaver seems remarkably improved following a farstone tech's advice...thank the lord for him or her...anh... What else can I do with the Ram Disk. It seems I can make some more ram disks so what can I do with them to improve performance. Farstones software lets the settings be saved after a reboot. oh, I almost forgot. What is the maximum size for a Ram Disk in Windows XP Home Editin. I tried 1GB but no, Windows complained. 256MBs is going ok. How big would I want the ram disks I use anyway....? I do play some computer games, the biggest size of the largest game application is about 3.5GBs. -- ....scribble...scribble...scribble... |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
now using a small ramdisk
To learn more about your software product consult the manufacturer.
-- Xandros "umwhat" wrote in message ... Farstones ram disk. I am curious, I have put the temp folder in a ram disk and I think it is rendering that is now taking place much faster and the screensaver seems remarkably improved following a farstone tech's advice...thank the lord for him or her...anh... What else can I do with the Ram Disk. It seems I can make some more ram disks so what can I do with them to improve performance. Farstones software lets the settings be saved after a reboot. oh, I almost forgot. What is the maximum size for a Ram Disk in Windows XP Home Editin. I tried 1GB but no, Windows complained. 256MBs is going ok. How big would I want the ram disks I use anyway....? I do play some computer games, the biggest size of the largest game application is about 3.5GBs. -- ...scribble...scribble...scribble... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
now using a small ramdisk
While I am not familiar with the RAM disk program (Farstones) you are using unless it can use RAM above 4 GB that may be installed, for Windows XP Home Ed. I would think any RAM disk would be counterproductive. Using a RAM disk takes away from the normal (base) RAM that the OS and any running programs can use and then causes the computer to place extra data or program code in the computer's swap drive if the RAM is totally occupied. Considering that XP Home can use a maximum of about 3 - 3.5 GB of installed RAM (depending on hardware installed) you would be taking memory away from your computer games or other memory intensive programs you may run. Another issue that you may encounter with transferring a temp folder to a RAM disk is that it can only use the maximum size of that RAM set aside for it. If it is on the hard disk it will expand out to the full size of the drive which is probably many times the size available for any RAM disk. It the maximum file size hits the RAM disk size "wall" the program is going to crash and probably without any errors. After writing the above, I actually went to the web site of the program, http://www.farstone.com/software/virtual-hard-drive.htm, and while it is fantastic reading as most advertising is, I really liked the part about putting a data base on the RAM disk "Databases, Custom applications with high input and output, high bandwidth, or high security requirements." Man I can see having a power outage and having my database on a RAM disk. All would be instantly lost. I saw nothing in their literature about using extra RAM so what you are using is the RAM that the OS and programs could use. Sounds like SPAM to me! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
now using a small ramdisk
LVTravel wrote:
While I am not familiar with the RAM disk program (Farstones) you are using unless it can use RAM above 4 GB that may be installed, RAM Disk utilities can only use the RAM that the operating system can recognize and make available, these utilities cannot enable 32-bit Windows client operating systems to see or use more RAM than the operating system can, they (RAMDisks) still rely on the Windows Memory Manager to obtain memory allocations. John |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
now using a small ramdisk
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:08:26 -0400, "LVTravel"
wrote: While I am not familiar with the RAM disk program (Farstones) you are using unless it can use RAM above 4 GB that may be installed, for Windows XP Home Ed. I would think any RAM disk would be counterproductive. Using a RAM disk takes away from the normal (base) RAM that the OS and any running programs can use and then causes the computer to place extra data or program code in the computer's swap drive if the RAM is totally occupied. Considering that XP Home can use a maximum of about 3 - 3.5 GB of installed RAM (depending on hardware installed) you would be taking memory away from your computer games or other memory intensive programs you may run. The RAM disk is like any other application, and can only use the RAM that's available to Windows. So if you have 4GB and 3GB Of it is available, part of that is all that's available to the RAM Disk. In general, using a RAM disk under Windows has been a poor idea, and not good for performance, since it removes RAM from being available to Windows and what it's normally doing. However if someone clearly has more RAM than he can make use of (most people running XP with 4GB are in that category) that's not a problem. Another issue that you may encounter with transferring a temp folder to a RAM disk is that it can only use the maximum size of that RAM set aside for it. If it is on the hard disk it will expand out to the full size of the drive which is probably many times the size available for any RAM disk. Correct, and a good example of a bad use of a RAM disk -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
now using a small ramdisk
"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote in message ... On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:08:26 -0400, "LVTravel" wrote: While I am not familiar with the RAM disk program (Farstones) you are using unless it can use RAM above 4 GB that may be installed, for Windows XP Home Ed. I would think any RAM disk would be counterproductive. Using a RAM disk takes away from the normal (base) RAM that the OS and any running programs can use and then causes the computer to place extra data or program code in the computer's swap drive if the RAM is totally occupied. Considering that XP Home can use a maximum of about 3 - 3.5 GB of installed RAM (depending on hardware installed) you would be taking memory away from your computer games or other memory intensive programs you may run. The RAM disk is like any other application, and can only use the RAM that's available to Windows. So if you have 4GB and 3GB Of it is available, part of that is all that's available to the RAM Disk. In general, using a RAM disk under Windows has been a poor idea, and not good for performance, since it removes RAM from being available to Windows and what it's normally doing. However if someone clearly has more RAM than he can make use of (most people running XP with 4GB are in that category) that's not a problem. Another issue that you may encounter with transferring a temp folder to a RAM disk is that it can only use the maximum size of that RAM set aside for it. If it is on the hard disk it will expand out to the full size of the drive which is probably many times the size available for any RAM disk. Correct, and a good example of a bad use of a RAM disk -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup To Ken & John John, that is why I stated "unless it can" in my response. I know of no way for a program to "reach over" what is available in XP 32 or Vista 32 bit systems and did not think this RAM disk program could do so. The only reason I stated that "unless it can" was back in the old DOS days DOS could only see 640 MB RAM and everything else was considered Extended Memory that a RAM disk could access with the correct memory managers in place. You both generally just validated exactly what I said. Thanks. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
now using a small ramdisk
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:10:57 -0400, "LVTravel"
wrote: "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote in message ... On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:08:26 -0400, "LVTravel" wrote: While I am not familiar with the RAM disk program (Farstones) you are using unless it can use RAM above 4 GB that may be installed, for Windows XP Home Ed. I would think any RAM disk would be counterproductive. Using a RAM disk takes away from the normal (base) RAM that the OS and any running programs can use and then causes the computer to place extra data or program code in the computer's swap drive if the RAM is totally occupied. Considering that XP Home can use a maximum of about 3 - 3.5 GB of installed RAM (depending on hardware installed) you would be taking memory away from your computer games or other memory intensive programs you may run. The RAM disk is like any other application, and can only use the RAM that's available to Windows. So if you have 4GB and 3GB Of it is available, part of that is all that's available to the RAM Disk. In general, using a RAM disk under Windows has been a poor idea, and not good for performance, since it removes RAM from being available to Windows and what it's normally doing. However if someone clearly has more RAM than he can make use of (most people running XP with 4GB are in that category) that's not a problem. Another issue that you may encounter with transferring a temp folder to a RAM disk is that it can only use the maximum size of that RAM set aside for it. If it is on the hard disk it will expand out to the full size of the drive which is probably many times the size available for any RAM disk. Correct, and a good example of a bad use of a RAM disk -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup To Ken & John John, that is why I stated "unless it can" in my response. I know of no way for a program to "reach over" what is available in XP 32 or Vista 32 bit systems and did not think this RAM disk program could do so. The only reason I stated that "unless it can" was back in the old DOS days DOS could only see 640 MB RAM and everything else was considered Extended Memory that a RAM disk could access with the correct memory managers in place. You both generally just validated exactly what I said. Thanks. You're welcome. I didn't mean to disagree with you, just to clarify a point or two. -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|