Mars

Member
  • Content Count

    236
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Mars

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Mars

    Seek Times

    Good points - but your probably wasting your time SCSA has almost a thousand posts on this board since '03 and in his last point - states that doubling the rpm will cut the time required to get his data in half. I couldn't even guess how many times and in how many different ways this myth has been crushed and obliterated - some people will just hang on to their ideas regardless I guess. Anyways, I'm off to play some Farcry on my 6 disk raid 0 made from original 9 gig 10K Atlas drives - (that's like 60K rpm - and that means it RulZ)
  2. Mars

    Seek Times

    That is just so incredibly wrong. So much useful information in this post that was apparently just lost... http://www.storagereview.com/php/benchmark..._1=283&devCnt=2
  3. Lufthansen, I have seen WinXP do this before - never did anything beyond the basic attempts to remove it, as something more...... interesting always seems to appear after about 15 minutes of screwing around with the pagefile.sys. Sorry not much help, but wanted you to know that your not crazy - must be just some particular circumstances under which this issue shows up.
  4. If I ran over 3 old ladies, stole a couple orphans, sold them on eBay, made it across the Mexican border, and then 3 weeks later was discovered at an AA meeting - no one would give a stinker that I was looking for help.
  5. I hope the moderator that PM'd me see's who is starting trouble this time. 194895[/snapback] Somehow I suspect I will be OK
  6. It's suprising that this still needs to be said - but its quality, not quantity - And you BuddyLite, rank pretty damn low on the quality scale.... "Preteen response" was a pretty accurate description - Simon has obviously seen enough of your posts to have gained an accurate understanding of you.
  7. Mars

    Maxtor Atlas 15k II benchmarks

    Looks like I didn't have to You were trying to placate the RAID 0 user..... I'm not even sure what to say to that. From now on, why don't we stick to the truth of the matter, not some cute lines to try and make people like Buddy Lite feel better about their striped 'cudas.. Your viewpoint on that thread jumped so wildly depending on what page you were reading, its difficult to nail you on anything. For example I could quote you as saying something stupid on page 3, and you will simply quote yourself from page 2 saying the opposite. Actually - give it a chance, after about a half a bottle of tequilla, that quote starts to make sense. Scary.
  8. Mars

    Maxtor Atlas 15k II benchmarks

    Can't possibly be as good as your RAIDed SSD array. Dude, don't be facetious. Unless you know what you're talking about don't talk. Eugene sounds pretty accurate to me - are you claiming that you did not have a huge argument about the worth of RAID for home users based on your somewhat dubious experience with raiding SSD? If you don't remember, I would be glad to dig up the post containing all of your bullshit. And if I were you, I would seriously consider taking your own advice.
  9. Mars

    Chickenhawks.

    http://www.vietnamwar.com/HowardDeandraftdeferment.htm
  10. Mars

    Windows 2003 Out of the Box Security

    None of those objects found by Ad aware were installed intentionally. Sure you can torch any OS intentionally but why would you? Oh come on! That was totally done intentionally and to claim otherwise is a joke - Nobody accumulates that kind of crap in 2 days 'accidentally' - go look at the list of stuff he has again.
  11. Mars

    Windows 2003 Out of the Box Security

    Yeah this is kinda stupid - at least half of those things are installable and require someone to click on an OK box to install (not to mention he's dl'ing torrents - and running them I assume) - security to me doesn't mean that the user can't torch it intentionally. Give me any FreeBSD box with root access and I'll trash it in 20 seconds - does this mean I don't think its secure?
  12. Mars

    The Death Of Raid

    Actually you could have better performance by getting a new disk and RAID0 it with the overflowing one. Of course, your system might already be bottlenecked by IO bandwith so the actual improvement might not be that significant. But your volume layout and workflow seems to be the ideal scenario for benefitting from RAID0. Except for a few small details: RAID 0 performance boost is questionable. The final resting place for my data would -never- be on a stripe These days hard drive space is so limiting, that I would never intentially purchase another drive the same size as one I have, due to limited number of bays. If my 80 gig runs out, I'm buying a 160 or larger, 2 80's just use up two bays and lose their value faster. I use 80 GB as an example because I have one sitting on my shelf - its not in use because all 5 bays are full of larger / same size drives. As hinted above, for typical workstation usage, you can expect about the same performance from a striped set of 80's as you can from a single 160 due to the size differential.
  13. Mars

    The Death Of Raid

    Yes, that is the assumption, since that is pretty much the scope of the topic. If your allowed to bring a 12 disk Atlas 10K V volume into the mix, then I'm allowed to test transfers between 2 RAM drives. Moving files is as fast on a single disk as it is on a 12 disk stripe. If your excessively moving files between volumes then its set up wrong. My file output, when finished processing, is in its final resting place - and I don't move files based on free space, I move them based on what should be on what disk. When that disk becomes too small (example, media drive, holds movies and mp3), its time to get a larger disk or remove some stuff. I don't separate same types of data across all my drives just to make room.
  14. Mars

    The Death Of Raid

    Maybe you should skip past the crass comments and read the well written posts that destroy every single point you raised. Your meager 10% improvement that your all excited about, I hope you realize that you could gain that by simply doubling the size of your current drive - oh wait, thats what you did when you striped them together..... The constant babbling about STR is almost too much to bear: It's handled here in depth.... But once again, and man am I getting sick of pointing this out - the comparison is between how 2 properly configured disks compare against a raid 0 - and for the truly disk bound IO operations, say unpacking a 5 gig .tar file - drive a > drive b is going to destroy a raid 0 array unpacking to itself every single time. You want that 8 percent performance boost? Go buy a drive twice as big and use your current drive as your second work disk. Oh, and as far as IPEAK - It shows the same 8%-10% (im not going to go verify) performance boost with RAID 0 (or a disk with twice the capacity) as your friends tests show. This has all been covered in depth in about 15 other threads at the very least.
  15. Mars

    Bad Malware?

    You were right - the simplest solution was to re-format and re-install. Painful, at a large part of a day, but ultimately the only real solution. She says she owes me... Future Shock The number of "help a friend" jobs that I've done, where I've spent 20+ hrs trying to fix a system (becuase of malware) is incredible (and I know many of us here have done this). At least now I worked out how to identify when it's best just to start over... But my favourites are either bad drivers (HP all-in-one printers come to mind) or malware that hooks into the system so deeply (eg the TCP/IP stack, etc), that removing the malware incorrectly results in a dead system... FYI - I ran into 2 of these last month, TCP/IP functionality totally destroyed by spyware crap (Ad-aware found 850+ items on one of these systems) Even after removal of bad things, TCP/IP still doesn't work. After some research I finally resolved it by repairing the TCP/IP stack with this cmd: netsh int ip reset resetlog.txt Google for "reinstall tcp/ip windows xp" for more information. From what I read, this should have fixed the non-connectivity issue, but it didn't, next I copied over the registry settings from a working XP machine: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Services\WinSock2 and HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Services\WinSock After this I may have run the netsh command again before it worked, but I don't remember.