For Tumbleweed

[kurttrail]

Hey!

Well...I guess you were talking more from a SysOP's standpoint.Where
it's crucial not to take any chances at all.
I'm on the other hand more concerned about perfomance.I have no
reason to make C: images...I've been using computers for 7 years and
only had HD failure once.And even then it didn't happen at
once...Dying took like 3-4 days.
So HD mechanical failure is not something to take into account when
you're talking about home usage of PC's.
I think that as far as backup goes...It's the best NOT to use HD's at
all.What for if we have CD's?
If I had files larger than 700MB I would think about DVD-RW or
something....

So basically you're "prejudice" against RAID,huh?
I probably should just experiment and compare your proposal vs.RAID-0
,perfomance wise
And what do you think about SCSI? Or you also un-SCSIed PC's
before?It's weird....they are so much more expensive and they still
DO exist in the industry,why? If they wouldn't be offering
significant performance increase,then they would have been out of
stores long time ago...

I heard some ppl recommended NOT to use Partition Magic on NTFS
drives?


One guy wrote me about my cluster question that hardware and software
vendors work
together to optimize the performance of PC's.....
I remember that when I learned about how RAM is accessed by CPU,it's
by pages 4K each if I remember correctly.
He was saying that 4K cluster and 4K page size in RAM are of the same
size done by purpose.
So for the virtual memory is faster to access 4K clusters because
that's how it's faster loaded to RAM and then processed by CPU.That's
what I understood from what he had told me anyways.

Alon

Haven't you learned to reply in the same thread yet? I'm sure, that someone
around here can help you out with that.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Alon Brodski]

Hey!

Well...I guess you were talking more from a SysOP's standpoint.Where it's
crucial not to take any chances at all.
I'm on the other hand more concerned about perfomance.I have no reason to
make C: images...I've been using computers for 7 years and only had HD
failure once.And even then it didn't happen at once...Dying took like 3-4
days.
So HD mechanical failure is not something to take into account when you're
talking about home usage of PC's.
I think that as far as backup goes...It's the best NOT to use HD's at
all.What for if we have CD's?
If I had files larger than 700MB I would think about DVD-RW or something....

So basically you're "prejudice" against RAID,huh?
I probably should just experiment and compare your proposal vs.RAID-0
,perfomance wise
And what do you think about SCSI? Or you also un-SCSIed PC's before?It's
weird....they are so much more expensive and they still DO exist in the
industry,why? If they wouldn't be offering significant performance
increase,then they would have been out of stores long time ago...

I heard some ppl recommended NOT to use Partition Magic on NTFS drives?


One guy wrote me about my cluster question that hardware and software
vendors work
together to optimize the performance of PC's.....
I remember that when I learned about how RAM is accessed by CPU,it's by
pages 4K each if I remember correctly.
He was saying that 4K cluster and 4K page size in RAM are of the same
size done by purpose.
So for the virtual memory is faster to access 4K clusters because that's how
it's faster loaded to RAM and then processed by CPU.That's what I understood
from what he had told me anyways.

Alon