Optimum disk layout for incoming and temp ?
|
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Optimum disk layout for incoming and temp ?
| nwpsys |
Mar 9 2005, 11:58
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 15-April 04 |
Am I right in thinking that if I locate my emule temp and emule incoming directories on seperate physical disks, when a file is completing I will get the optimum performance ? I am thinking that if the disk head isn't having to move around so much on a single disk, I will get a more resource friendly process. At the moment I have the two on separete drives located on the SAME physical disk, and my PC really slows as a file completes. Thanks, nwpsys |
||||||||||||||||
|
Post
#1
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Reevel |
Mar 9 2005, 12:30
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 23-March 03 |
QUOTE(nwpsys @ Mar 9 2005, 11:58) Am I right in thinking that if I locate my emule temp and emule incoming directories on seperate physical disks, when a file is completing I will get the optimum performance ? Yes you are. |
|
Post
#2
|
|
| nwpsys |
Mar 9 2005, 12:52
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 15-April 04 |
I don't get to be right very often :-) Thanks.
nwpsys |
|
Post
#3
|
|
| muleteer |
Mar 9 2005, 13:10
|
|
Group: Betatesters Posts: 8261 Joined: 29-February 04 |
Basically it's a tradeoff. If you have only one physical disk, then put temp and incoming folders on the same partition for best performance (when a file completes, it will simply be renamed; not moved around at all). The downside is that any fragmentation in the file is also retained. You can minimize this by 'preallocating disk space' for the files as you add them to your downloads.
|
|
Post
#4
|
|
| nwpsys |
Mar 10 2005, 07:32
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 15-April 04 |
Thanks muleteer.
It sounds like even if I do have more than one physical disk ( I have 4 ! ) it may still be worth keeping the temp and incoming in the same partition to avoid any sort of I/O traffic at all when completing. I run a defrag pass once a week and this always seems to make a good job of reducing fragmentation on the large files - as long as I keep a bit of free space on the disk. Didn't know about the preallocating space feature, but I have found it now and may give that a try. Cheers, nwpsys |
|
Post
#5
|
|
| muleteer |
Mar 10 2005, 08:20
|
|
Group: Betatesters Posts: 8261 Joined: 29-February 04 |
Personally, I have made a small (1GB) partition for the emule folder (exe and config etc.), and another (large) partition for the temp and incoming folders. A lot of the fragmentation comes from the emule.log and debug.log files in the emule folder, so I can defragment that partition very quickly.
|
|
Post
#6
|
|
| nwpsys |
Mar 10 2005, 12:30
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 15-April 04 |
With my settings, I don't write any log files. I think that was the default, I can't remember switching them off. Am I losing out by not having them ?
BTW, I am going to reorg my discs to have temp and incoming in the same partition, I think. nwpsys |
|
Post
#7
|
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st May 2013 - 10:07 |