What to use all my new RAM for...
-
If you put all your intermediate files on a ram drive, that will defeat the incremental build functioanlity once you reboot your system. If it were me, I'd improve the disk IO bottleneck instead of using a ramdrive. ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -- modified at 7:55 Tuesday 10th January, 2006
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
If you put all your intermediate files on a ram drive, that will defat the incremental build functioanlity once you reboot your system.
Some of the RAM drives out there let you save/restore images to disk. Or I can just write a quick script to do the same thing. Even without that, I don't mind taking the hit of a full rebuild once at the start of coding session.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
-
Taka Muraoka wrote:
RAM drive
Is this what its name suggest ? I did not even know that it exists. ~RaGE();
"RAM" drives are a throw-back to DOS (something a lot of you have probably never seen in it's pure form). Back then, hard drives were expensive (my first 20mb drive cost $700). Memory was MUCH cheaper at that time, and DOS didn't really make much use of RAM over 640K. Extended memory cards that features as much as 1-5mb of RAM became useful as RAM drives. However, the RAM in most computers is volatile, meaning whatever's there when you reboot will be gone when you see the C:\> prompt again. Setting up RAM disks in the true and historic sense of the term) in a modern Windows computer is kinda pointless. ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
If you put all your intermediate files on a ram drive, that will defat the incremental build functioanlity once you reboot your system.
Some of the RAM drives out there let you save/restore images to disk. Or I can just write a quick script to do the same thing. Even without that, I don't mind taking the hit of a full rebuild once at the start of coding session.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
Hmmm. I have 1075 intermediate files spread across 37 folders. It seems to me that any time savings realized by using a ram drive would be devoured by the time it takes to delete/copy/copy those files (if the system doesn't crash first). I stick by my claim that you're better off improving your disk I/O. ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
-
Taka Muraoka wrote:
I found a few hardware RAM disks that might tickle your fancy.
Those are called "solidstate drives", and they are extremely pricey compared to platter drives of the same capacity. ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
they are extremely pricey compared to platter drives of the same capacity
No-one's going to want to pay for one of the same capacity. But the Gigabyte i-RAM[^] has just been released and uses bog-standard memory modules. Can't seem to find a price on it anywhere but this[^] suggests an RRP of around USD 150 (plus the cost of the memory itself) which is not too bad (especially if you've got some spare memory lying around).
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
-
Hmmm. I have 1075 intermediate files spread across 37 folders. It seems to me that any time savings realized by using a ram drive would be devoured by the time it takes to delete/copy/copy those files (if the system doesn't crash first). I stick by my claim that you're better off improving your disk I/O. ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
It seems to me that any time savings realized by using a ram drive would be devoured by the time it takes to delete/copy/copy those files
I have a lot more than that but a lot of them change very infrequently. So a smart sync will only copy the files it needs to. Plus I can do something else while getting the files set up and save them all as part of my overnight batch runs i.e. it doesn't eat into useful development time. My main dev box is a laptop and I already have a 7200rpm drive so I'm a bit limited in what I can do. I believe you can get RAID'ed laptops now; God knows what they weigh :rolleyes:
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
-
I probably have a gig of that memory going unused most of the time. I'm using VC6, not VS 2005 :-) I found a few hardware RAM disks that might tickle your fancy. Some of them slot into an existing drive bay, use an SATA interface and for all intents and purposes, look like a normal disk drive. And boot Windows in several seconds flat :-)
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
-
Windows comes with one installed[^], although it's not very good. Haven't tried the instructions listed there; you're probably better off following the MSDN link.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
Taka Muraoka wrote:
Windows comes with one installed[^], although it's not very good.
did you read the last two posts on that link? "One other thing you can do is to put your swap file (Page File) on the RAM drive. This is probably better than putting anything you want to keep on it in case you ever want to restart your machine, anyway." :-D
-
I just upgraded my dev box with 2 Gb of memory (woo hoo!) and it runs pretty nice now :-) I was wondering if anyone had experience with using a RAM drive and if it made much difference? I was looking at speeding up VC6 builds, in particular e.g. putting all the intermediate files in the RAM drive.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
I once tried with VC6 - building to RAM drive is WAY faster (30%..50%). But my Build folder requires 2.5GB, so this is no option for me. I wouldn't do it without having 1G remaining for OS and application.
We say "get a life" to each other, disappointed or jokingly. What we forget, though, is that this is possibly the most destructive advice you can give to a geek.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist -
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
they are extremely pricey compared to platter drives of the same capacity
No-one's going to want to pay for one of the same capacity. But the Gigabyte i-RAM[^] has just been released and uses bog-standard memory modules. Can't seem to find a price on it anywhere but this[^] suggests an RRP of around USD 150 (plus the cost of the memory itself) which is not too bad (especially if you've got some spare memory lying around).
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
Thanks for that link. A few years back I really wanted one of these but all the manufacturers were charging a 10X markup on memory price (several thousand dollars / GB) so that made it totally out of my price range. The only problem now is the 4 1GB modules is still too small to be a boot drive for me... John
-
I probably have a gig of that memory going unused most of the time. I'm using VC6, not VS 2005 :-) I found a few hardware RAM disks that might tickle your fancy. Some of them slot into an existing drive bay, use an SATA interface and for all intents and purposes, look like a normal disk drive. And boot Windows in several seconds flat :-)
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
Taka Muraoka wrote:
I'm using VC6, not VS 2005
Ahhh, that explains it! Regards, Nish
My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET
-
Hmmm. I have 1075 intermediate files spread across 37 folders. It seems to me that any time savings realized by using a ram drive would be devoured by the time it takes to delete/copy/copy those files (if the system doesn't crash first). I stick by my claim that you're better off improving your disk I/O. ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
It depends on how often you crash. Doing "normal dev work" on XP, I'm at about 1..2 crashes / month. SO I have the full build hit once a day. Also if you put the finals on a normal disk, methinks a project needs not be recompiled.
We say "get a life" to each other, disappointed or jokingly. What we forget, though, is that this is possibly the most destructive advice you can give to a geek.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist -
I just upgraded my dev box with 2 Gb of memory (woo hoo!) and it runs pretty nice now :-) I was wondering if anyone had experience with using a RAM drive and if it made much difference? I was looking at speeding up VC6 builds, in particular e.g. putting all the intermediate files in the RAM drive.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
Taka Muraoka wrote:
I was wondering if anyone had experience with using a RAM drive...
Not since Windows v3.11.
"The words of God are not like the oak leaf which dies and falls to the earth, but like the pine tree which stays green forever." - Native American Proverb
-
I once tried with VC6 - building to RAM drive is WAY faster (30%..50%). But my Build folder requires 2.5GB, so this is no option for me. I wouldn't do it without having 1G remaining for OS and application.
We say "get a life" to each other, disappointed or jokingly. What we forget, though, is that this is possibly the most destructive advice you can give to a geek.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighistThat's what I suspected. The disk gets hit so hard, especially during a link, that I figured a RAM disk could well help (and make Windows that much more responsive). I expect even a small one, say 500Mb, with the key files (e.g. the PCH's) will make a difference. Thanks.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
-
That's what I suspected. The disk gets hit so hard, especially during a link, that I figured a RAM disk could well help (and make Windows that much more responsive). I expect even a small one, say 500Mb, with the key files (e.g. the PCH's) will make a difference. Thanks.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
> The disk gets hit so hard, especially during a link, that I figured a RAM disk could well help I used to use a smallish ramdisk (128MB) to write temp files for a specific project a few months back, and it helped tremendously. Of course it's counterproductive for large projects, so I'd say go with trial and error--I'm sure you'll find the right balance. Actually, I'm sure that would make an interesting CP article... :-)
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
It seems to me that any time savings realized by using a ram drive would be devoured by the time it takes to delete/copy/copy those files
I have a lot more than that but a lot of them change very infrequently. So a smart sync will only copy the files it needs to. Plus I can do something else while getting the files set up and save them all as part of my overnight batch runs i.e. it doesn't eat into useful development time. My main dev box is a laptop and I already have a 7200rpm drive so I'm a bit limited in what I can do. I believe you can get RAID'ed laptops now; God knows what they weigh :rolleyes:
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
Taka Muraoka wrote:
God knows what they weigh
They're heavy. ;P I've got an Alienware Area 51m with dual RAIDed 60GB hard drives. I'm just thankful that my backpack provides enough support so this thing doesn't break my back. :)
Picture a huge catholic cathedral. In it there's many people, including a gregorian monk choir. You know, those who sing beautifully. Then they start singing, in latin, as they always do: "Ad hominem..." -Jörgen Sigvardsson
-
That's what I suspected. The disk gets hit so hard, especially during a link, that I figured a RAM disk could well help (and make Windows that much more responsive). I expect even a small one, say 500Mb, with the key files (e.g. the PCH's) will make a difference. Thanks.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
You can check your CPU usage - if the CPU is clogged, a RAM disk won't help much.
We say "get a life" to each other, disappointed or jokingly. What we forget, though, is that this is possibly the most destructive advice you can give to a geek.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist -
You can check your CPU usage - if the CPU is clogged, a RAM disk won't help much.
We say "get a life" to each other, disappointed or jokingly. What we forget, though, is that this is possibly the most destructive advice you can give to a geek.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist -
I just upgraded my dev box with 2 Gb of memory (woo hoo!) and it runs pretty nice now :-) I was wondering if anyone had experience with using a RAM drive and if it made much difference? I was looking at speeding up VC6 builds, in particular e.g. putting all the intermediate files in the RAM drive.
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.
Windows automatically uses free RAM as additional disk cache. A RAM disk is not going to save you a lot of time. The first thing you should do is disable the swap file. Windows likes to swap away applications when they are minimized, even if enough memory is available.
-
Taka Muraoka wrote:
Windows comes with one installed[^], although it's not very good.
did you read the last two posts on that link? "One other thing you can do is to put your swap file (Page File) on the RAM drive. This is probably better than putting anything you want to keep on it in case you ever want to restart your machine, anyway." :-D
I am impressed by that suggestion - there is some realy good logic there. Guess he has never done any timings to prove a successful result though. :sigh:
Team Leader - Team Code Project[^] :cool:
-
Is the compiler smart enough to go idle while blocking on diskio, or does it sit there throwing a steady stream of noops until the read completes?
it's idling (That's the typical behavior if you issue a synchronous file read/write). On my old dev box at w*rk CPU utilization was rarely exceeded 60% after the dependency check.
We say "get a life" to each other, disappointed or jokingly. What we forget, though, is that this is possibly the most destructive advice you can give to a geek.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist
