Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: RAM Disk

Expand Messages
  • waltmatheus
    It s a moot point now but I had a typo error, I have 2 GB of RAM, not 1. Even so, I didn t move the pagefile for the reason that Norm wrote about, I thought I
    Message 1 of 10 , Feb 1, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      It's a moot point now but I had a typo error, I have 2 GB of RAM, not 1. Even so, I didn't move the pagefile for the reason that Norm wrote about, I thought I didn't have enough RAM to do so.

      I now have a better understanding of the process, as a result I removed the RAM Disk.

      Thanks to those that replied.


      --- In simplycomputers2@yahoogroups.com, Norm Higgs wrote:
      >
      > Roger - with only 1 GB of installed RAM, that would just be handicapping
      > the Operating System - basically limiting it to no more than 1 GB of
      > memory space - whereas with a normal page file on a hard drive, it can
      > expand to a full 4 GB of memory space if it needs to.
      >
      > I talked about this technique in another group yesterday. Basically it
      > works like the old DOS Extended Memory Manager. You install more RAM
      > than Windows can normally see (8 GB is what I would start with) and you
      > configure the unused part into a RAM drive, then put the swap file on it.
      >
      > I think the idea behind what the OP wrote about was just placing the
      > browser cache into a RAM drive. If you have a full 4 GB of RAM to work
      > with this might be beneficial, but only when reloading a page that's
      > been visited before (and therefore is in the cache already). But opening
      > the browser and new pages are going to load 'the old way'. Its certainly
      > not going to help out with dynamic content pages such as facebook.
      >
      > Norm Higgs
      > http://forbiddenpc.com
      > http://forbiddenpc.blogspot.com
      > http://www.power-blog.com/info/4365
      > http://freetrafficbar.com?r=74276
      >
      >
      > On 2013-01-31 6:35 PM, RogerX19 wrote:
      > > Did you move your pagefile off your hard drive and into the RAM disk?
      > >
      > > rogerX
      > >
      > > --- In simplycomputers2@yahoogroups.com, waltmatheus wrote:
      > >> XP SP3 IE8 FF18
      > >> 1GB RAM
      > >> I generally use FF for browsing, rarely use IE.
      > >>
      > >> A while back I read about running a RAM Disk tool to speed up browsing by using more RAM and less of the pagefile. I recently installed Starwind RAM Disk.
      > >> http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/Boot-Manager-Disk/StarWind-RAM-Disk.shtml
      > >> http://tinyurl.com/asem44p
      > >>
      > >> I have MemInfo installed with the default settings, it's a small tool in the systray that shows pagefile and memory usage.
      > >> http://www.carthagosoft.net/Downloads.php
      > >>
      > >> Just prior to installing and setting up the RAM Disk, MemInfo showed my pagefile use at 312 MB with RAM use at 513 MB (25%).
      > >> As I type this my pagefile use is at 590 MB and the RAM is at 735 MB (36%). I understand the increase in used RAM because that is where the FF and IE cache is stored, but I'm puzzled by the big increase in the pagefile, 312 to 590. I expected the pagefile to be less, not more.
      > >>
      > >> After typing the above into notepad I launched FF and signed in to the group. The pagefile size is now reported to be 722 MB with RAM at 871 MB (42%). The pagefile increased 410 MB and the RAM increased 281 MB.
      > >>
      > >> Although it appears that FF pages load quicker (possibly placebo effect?), the FF cache in the RAM Disk is only 12 MB. When I setup the RAM Disk I allocated 256 MB for the cache.
      > >>
      > >> It appears that adding a RAM Disk has done very little. If anyone is familiar with RAM Disk usage perhaps you have an explanation you can share.
    • DRAGON
      You might post a link to the article on RAM disks so that we can read it. I would like to see what technology it is based on. I am curious to hear why you need
      Message 2 of 10 , Feb 2, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        You might post a link to the article on RAM disks so that we can read
        it. I would like to see what technology it is based on.

        I am curious to hear why you need more browsing speed.

        If you have broadband and a recent (vintage) PC, there is not a lot that
        can be done to speed up browsing. Why? Because it is usually not your
        machine that is the problem. It is usually the speed of the data
        traveling from its site to your location that is the bottleneck. You
        just need to make sure that your machine is able to receive the data as
        fast as it comes.

        http://www.pcworld.com/article/2023750/faster-better-stronger-get-your-pc-in-tip-top-shape.html#tk.nl_today

        You can try to optimize your machine by removing things that can slow it
        down using the link above.


        DragonFly

        On 1/31/2013 7:01 PM, Norm Higgs wrote:
        > Simply installing a RAM disk is not going to do anything to help your
        > system run faster (maybe I'm missing something here?) Your results are
        > pretty much exactly what I would expect. Because now you have reserved
        > some of your RAM (for the RAM drive) and the system can no longer use it
        > as it normally would, the page file will naturally be bigger. Its just
        > like increasing the amount of shared RAM in a system with integrated
        > graphics.
        >
        > I think maybe what you are getting at here is when you have a machine
        > with more RAM than 32 bit Windows can utilize (>4 GB), a RAM disk can be
        > installed that will use that extra memory as a drive. Then you can move
        > the page file to that RAM drive and greatly increase its performance -
        > because RAM is much faster than reading and writing to the hard drive.
        >
        > If you are just putting the browser cache in the RAM drive, well, the
        > only time that really comes into play is when you reload a page you have
        > already visited. But as far as opening the browser, it still has to be
        > read from the hard drive, and written into the RAM, so a RAM drive will
        > have no effect there.
        >
        > What it comes down to is that there really is no such thing as a free
        > lunch. There is just no substitute for more physical memory.
        >
        > Norm Higgs
        > http://forbiddenpc.com
        > http://forbiddenpc.blogspot.com
        > http://www.power-blog.com/info/4365
        > http://freetrafficbar.com?r=74276
        >
        > >
        > > XP SP3 IE8 FF18
        > >
        > > 1GB RAM
        > >
        > > I generally use FF for browsing, rarely use IE.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > A while back I read about running a RAM Disk tool to speed up
        > browsing by using more RAM and less of the pagefile. I recently
        > installed Starwind RAM Disk.
        > >
        > >
        > http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/Boot-Manager-Disk/StarWind-RAM-Disk.shtml
        > >
        > > http://tinyurl.com/asem44p
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > I have MemInfo installed with the default settings, it's a small tool
        > in the systray that shows pagefile and memory usage.
        > >
        > > http://www.carthagosoft.net/Downloads.php
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Just prior to installing and setting up the RAM Disk, MemInfo showed
        > my pagefile use at 312 MB with RAM use at 513 MB (25%).
        > >
        > > As I type this my pagefile use is at 590 MB and the RAM is at 735 MB
        > (36%). I understand the increase in used RAM because that is where the
        > FF and IE cache is stored, but I'm puzzled by the big increase in the
        > pagefile, 312 to 590. I expected the pagefile to be less, not more.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > After typing the above into notepad I launched FF and signed in to
        > the group. The pagefile size is now reported to be 722 MB with RAM at
        > 871 MB (42%). The pagefile increased 410 MB and the RAM increased 281 MB.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Although it appears that FF pages load quicker (possibly placebo
        > effect?), the FF cache in the RAM Disk is only 12 MB. When I setup the
        > RAM Disk I allocated 256 MB for the cache.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > It appears that adding a RAM Disk has done very little. If anyone is
        > familiar with RAM Disk usage perhaps you have an explanation you can share.
        > >
        > >
      • Bill Aycock
        The most complete and comprehensive CERT alert I can remember has just been released. It is: US-CERT Alert TA13-032A Oracle Java 7 Multiple Vulnerabilities
        Message 3 of 10 , Feb 2, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          The most complete and comprehensive CERT alert I can remember has just been
          released. It is:

          US-CERT Alert TA13-032A
          Oracle Java 7 Multiple Vulnerabilities

          This is well worth getting, saving, reading and following.

          Good luck--Bill--W4BSG
        • waltmatheus
          Java SE 7u13. This release includes important security fixes. Oracle strongly recommends that all Java SE 7 users upgrade to this release.
          Message 4 of 10 , Feb 2, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            "Java SE 7u13. This release includes important security fixes. Oracle strongly recommends that all Java SE 7 users upgrade to this release."
            http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
            http://tinyurl.com/355cx3m

            Users can go to the Control Panel > Java, on the General tab click on About. The latest version is Version 7 Update 13 (build 1.7.0_13-b20). If users have a version with a lower number they are subject to vulnerabilities and should upgrade.


            --- In simplycomputers2@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Aycock" wrote:
            >
            > The most complete and comprehensive CERT alert I can remember has just been
            > released. It is:
            >
            > US-CERT Alert TA13-032A
            > Oracle Java 7 Multiple Vulnerabilities
            >
            > This is well worth getting, saving, reading and following.
            >
            > Good luck--Bill--W4BSG
          • waltmatheus
            Java SE 7u13. This release includes important security fixes. Oracle strongly recommends that all Java SE 7 users upgrade to this release.
            Message 5 of 10 , Feb 2, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              "Java SE 7u13. This release includes important security fixes. Oracle strongly recommends that all Java SE 7 users upgrade to this release."
              http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
              http://tinyurl.com/355cx3m

              Users can go to the Control Panel > Java, on the General tab click on About. The latest version is Version 7 Update 13 (build 1.7.0_13-b20). If users have a version with a lower number they are subject to vulnerabilities and should upgrade.


              --- In simplycomputers2@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Aycock" wrote:
              >
              > The most complete and comprehensive CERT alert I can remember has just been
              > released. It is:
              >
              > US-CERT Alert TA13-032A
              > Oracle Java 7 Multiple Vulnerabilities
              >
              > This is well worth getting, saving, reading and following.
              >
              > Good luck--Bill--W4BSG
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.