• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About mbor

  • Rank
  1. I am confused. Whenever I hear about using a RAM drive for the pagefile a question comes to my mind: If you have enought RAM, why not disable pagefile altogether?
  2. mbor

    The Death Of Raid

    Another example that comes to my mind: When I had a single drive, sometimes while defragmenting it my P2P software would break its downloads. I assumed that it couldn't get access to the drive in time to write the incoming data. Since I got RAID 0 I have never seen it happen again, although I defrag very often. Probably there are other explanations why this could have imporved, but I quite naturally assumed that it had to do with switching to RAID. I see forum members here know a lot about the operation of RAID and hard drives, so perhaps you could tell me if it is even possible that RAID 0 helped or if it must have been some other factor.
  3. mbor

    The Death Of Raid

    Am I a victim of the placebo effect? Please tell me! I read a lot here how RAID 0 is not improving desktop performance, although it does improve the sequential transfer rate. Well, I may be just experiencing the placebo effect, but I think it did improve performance of some apps in my case. Here are the examples of the performance improvements I have noticed in some standard desktop applications when working with big amounts of data, tell me what you think: 1. Windows Media Player with a big media library. Switching to the media library for the first time after player startup takes quite a lot of time with my collection of 13000 mp3s. The library database is stored in a single 78MB file. Seems like a sequential read to me... 2. Outlook Express startup with a lot of email (btw, i'm not using it anymore, for security reasons) Takes a lot of time to start up with a lot of emails stored (about 2000 messages). The email is stored in a couple of files that add up to about 300MB. Again the read seems pretty sequential... 3. Windows Explorer Expanding a folder the with a lot of subfolders (300+). I think that's a sequential read, but I'm not sure. If you know NTFS, please educate me;) If I'm correct these are examples where the sequential transfer rate plays a dominant role in slowing the application down (the drives work intensively, while the CPU doesn't) for a couple of seconds - which can be pretty irritating. Please tell me if these examples are wrong for some reason and it's just my perception, or if these are indeed pretty much sequential reads and RAID 0 could in fact improve the performance in these cases. Thanks!