Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage > #2326
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage |
| Subject | Re: IDE or AHCI ? |
| Date | 2012-01-08 06:43 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <9mrlifFa8mU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <5YadnVh378gqYJjSnZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@giganews.com> <9mnj16F3v8U1@mid.individual.net> <je6ri9$b5u$1@dont-email.me> <9mp6c4Ff2jU1@mid.individual.net> <je9kge$v5o$1@dont-email.me> |
Krypsis wrote > Rod Speed wrote >> Krypsis wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>> Yousuf Khan wrote >>>>> Rod Speed wrote >>>>>> Yousuf Khan wrote >>>>>>> David Brown wrote >>>>>>>> NCQ won't make a significant difference in Linux, since it has >>>>>>>> always had good algorithms to order disk accesses to minimise >>>>>>>> head movement. It will sometimes make things worse, such as >>>>>>>> when the OS wants to enforce a particular order (for >>>>>>>> transactions to filesystem journals, for example). And NCQ >>>>>>>> doesn't help windows much either - after all, it only applies >>>>>>>> when you do more than one thing at a time. >>>>>>> I find that it doesn't even help even when multitasking. >>>>>> The benchmarks clearly show that it does. >>>>>> Not very dramatically tho. >>>>> Too bad you can't run benchmarks as your applications. >>>> You can however use what you care about the speed of as the benchmark. >>>>>>> I monitor the disk subsection of the Resource Monitor regularly, >>>>>>> and very often when the disk is busy the Disk Queue Length is >>>>>>> over 1.00 (meaning more than 1 process is actively waiting on >>>>>>> the disk) and the Active Time is pegged near 100%. >>>>>> Doesnt mean that NCQ doesnt help in that situaiton. >>>>> When I'm talking about the disk queue being higher than 1.00, I don't mean just something minor like 1.01, or >>>>> 1.10, but I'm talking about 5.00, or even 10.00! There could be 10 process waiting on the disk queue at any given >>>>> time. >>>> I just dont believe that that happens all that much for long to matter. >>>>> This normally happens during boot-up time, >>>> Like I have said to you before, anyone with even half a clue >>>> boots so rarely that that situation is completely irrelevant. If >>>> you care about the speed of your system, the only thing that >>>> makes any sense at all is to only boot very rarely, weeks or >>>> months apart, and suspend or hibernate, not shutdown. >>> I turn my computers off when not in use. No point using electricity >>> when I'm not using the computer. >> Even if you do, you can set it to hibernate or suspend when that >> happens so you dont get a full boot when you turn it on again, >> and so wont see that disk activity when you turn it on again. > If it is hibernated, a memory image is stored on the hard disk. Yes, but you dont get lots of different processes all attempting drive access simultanously, so you dont get the problem he was clearly talking about. You just have ONE process restoring the ram contents from the ONE file on the hard drive, and reading that linearly too. > Ergo, there needs to be disk activity to restore said image to RAM. But NOT a number of different processes competing for access to the drive. > In suspend mode, the computer goes into a low power mode but does not save data. A power outage whilst in this state > will result in data loss. Not with a laptop. > From Vista onwards, suspend mode will become hibernate on laptops after 3 hours of inactivity (default time). No reason why you have to accept the default setting. > From my experience, hibernate and suspend, on Windows, is not reliable. You're wrong, as always. The most you have to do is an occassional full reboot every month or few depending on how the machine is used, as Win cant go forever without a full reboot. >>> I turn the power off at the UPS but not at the wall socket. >> Why waste the power that the UPS uses ? > Because my modem and router also run from it and others in my household use them wirelessly. >>> Waiting for a bootup is no great pain. >> Its even less of a pain if you set it to hibernate or suspend. > How much of a pain is it to press one (1) button and enter one (1) password??? There is a much longer wait till its performing at full speed again. >>> I walk past my computer, hit a few buttons, do a few other things >>> and by the time I have finished that, the beast is up and ready. >> He was talking about obsessing about the disk activity. > I was talking about turning off versus hibernate/suspend. And ignoring his complaint about seeing lots of processes competing for drive access with a full reboot which you dont bet with hibernate and suspend. >>> I've yet to see Windows last months without a complete shutdown. >> More fool you. > You need to get out more. Nope, I use systems like that all the time thanks child. >>> Friends of mine are forced to reboot often because Windows gets itself tied up in knots. >> They dont have a clue about how to use it. >>> Linux, on the other hand, can go for years without even suspending or hibernating. >> But usually doesnt for various reasons. > Yes, people like me turn them off for various reasons, ie. to save on power when not in use. Thats just one way of saving power. > Windows, on the other hand, can't go the distance without a regular reboot. And that is MUCH less often than every time you stop using the PC. >>>> Even if you are silly enough to religiously update as often as you can, any reboot involved should happen when you >>>> arent using the system. >>>>> but it doesn't take very long for the disk queue to kick up to the >>>>> stratosphere at any time. >>>> Thats just plain wrong with numbers like that. >>>>> Just a few apps trying to access the same disk at the same >>>>> time,and you got major delays. >>>> Thats just plain wrong with modern hard drives. Very >>>> minor delays in fact with modern fast seeking drives. >>> You don't know what you're talking about. >> Everyone can see for themselves who doesnt know what they are talking about, child. > True, most people here seem to have worked out that you're a moron. Everyone can see for themselves that you are lying, as always. >>> I have modern fast seeking drives in all my computers bar my >>> Powermac and they ALL bog down when accessed by multiple programs at the same time. >> How odd that mine dont. I dont even bother to have a separate PVR >> anymore and I bet you couldnt even work out when its recording in a proper double blind trial with not being allowed >> to use the task manager to see whats running etc. > As if I care! I don't even bother with a PVR. You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant. What you may or may not claim to care about in spades. >>> I suggest you do a few simple experiments to prove this to yourself. >> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks child. > At 74 years of age, it's a fair guess that I was born a rather long time before you. Guess which pathetic little prat has just got egg all over its pathetic little face, yet again ? > Given the childish nature of your arguments, it's fairly obvious who is the child here. Guess which pathetic little prat has just got egg all over its pathetic little face, yet again ? >>> Do you reckon the seek limitations of mechanical hard drives might be the reason SSDs are so popular in applications >>> where speed is paramount? >> Taint the SEEK speed thats the reason for that, child. > It is ONE of the reasons Wrong, as always. > but not the only one. It aint even one of them, child.
Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
IDE or AHCI ? Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com> - 2012-01-03 12:30 -0600
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-03 21:05 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "arno fucker" <af@arnofucker.com> - 2012-01-04 12:41 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-04 12:58 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-04 00:07 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-01-04 08:53 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-04 20:32 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-01-04 14:44 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 07:37 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-04 22:56 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 09:48 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> - 2012-01-04 21:40 -0800
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-05 05:37 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 17:37 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-04 09:29 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-01-04 16:04 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-04 19:19 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-04 23:14 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-05 08:47 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 07:51 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-04 19:16 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 07:41 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-05 14:44 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 17:35 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-01-07 00:05 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-06 20:04 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-06 21:13 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net> - 2012-01-06 20:42 -0600
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-07 13:48 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-07 14:09 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-07 14:36 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-01-08 02:11 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 12:06 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-09 16:27 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 17:36 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 17:41 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Winniethepooh@100acrewoods.net (GMAN) - 2012-01-09 19:07 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-09 20:12 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-09 21:00 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 11:31 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-07 17:10 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2012-01-10 14:18 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 11:23 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-09 16:30 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-09 20:16 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net> - 2012-01-09 17:13 -0600
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-07 08:11 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-01-08 01:23 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 06:43 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? JW <none@dev.null> - 2012-01-09 05:23 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 10:24 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 09:34 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 20:04 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 15:33 +1100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-06 09:48 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-09 11:35 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-01-09 20:23 +0100
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-10 11:31 +0000
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2012-01-20 06:54 -0500
Re: IDE or AHCI ? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-04 19:14 +0000
csiph-web