Ram Partiton

[Macros]

Hi,

 

Defraggler could check for much free Ram and automatically create a ram partition (or under Windows more often named ramdisk)

to place temporary files there while defragging.

 

Pros:

• Huge speedup
  Ram is much faster than any Disk out there
  
• Reduces Wear on your disk
  Because the number of writes to your disk would be halved
  

 

Cons:

• Reduces responsiveness of system additionally while defragging
  As you take a bit of the Ram, if the user want's to make ram intesive tasks,
  they are slower. But because disk writes and reads are also slow,
  this doesn't make a big differences. (Can't play games anyhow)
  Just let the user >=1.5 Gig of Ram
  
• Big Point: Probability to lose data
  If the computer would be turned of, data in the ramdisk is lost.
  

 

So I would suggest to make this an option but suggest it to Laptopusers,

as they do not lose power immediately if there is an electrical power outage.

[eL_PuSHeR]

I think performance boost would be minimal. I think it just depends on how big read/write buffer is. RAM memory is used anyway.

[mr don]

Hi,

 

Defraggler could check for much free Ram and automatically create a ram partition (or under Windows more often named ramdisk)

to place temporary files there while defragging.

 

Pros:

• Huge speedup
  Ram is much faster than any Disk out there
  
• Reduces Wear on your disk
  Because the number of writes to your disk would be halved
  

 

Cons:

• Reduces responsiveness of system additionally while defragging
  As you take a bit of the Ram, if the user want's to make ram intesive tasks,
  they are slower. But because disk writes and reads are also slow,
  this doesn't make a big differences. (Can't play games anyhow)
  Just let the user >=1.5 Gig of Ram
  
• Big Point: Probability to lose data
  If the computer would be turned of, data in the ramdisk is lost.
  

 

So I would suggest to make this an option but suggest it to Laptopusers,

as they do not lose power immediately if there is an electrical power outage.

 

This would be a dangerous idea.

Sounds good, theoretically, but I know people who, all the time, seem to love hitting the power button to switch off the computer.

Even laptop users do this, bringing the laptop into standby/hibernation/total shutdown depending on their setup of the power configuration.

 

If data is moved to ram to be defragged, then back to the disk, I would prefer a little extra longer in defrag as a matter of safety, as opposed to a slight performance gain. The data would all have to be cycled through mem, anyway, so it would mitigate the speed increase gained. It would take a while for (fill in the blank # of MB/GB/TB) data to be cycled through mem, so may as well just let it direct access it instead.

[Augeas]

The concept is invalid. Data is remapped on the disk by the disk controller, not by any defragger.

[mr don]

The concept is invalid. Data is remapped on the disk by the disk controller, not by any defragger.

Yes, but no matter what it is mapped by (disk controller, etc), it still has to be cycled through...

 

It is better to be remapped direct drive than remapped in memory, because it would take a while just to load it all to mem, in addition to losing it all if the computer crashed. Low mem computers would suffer from "loss of ram".

 

Trying to do this all in memory would cause more problems than it would solve.

 

Of course, this is all hypothetically speaking, if mapping to mem were possible.