Optimum Cluster Size for Video Stuff...

H

Harry

I recently smoked my boot drive and am now setting things
up again, so I'm wondering if I can enhance overall video
processing performance if I bang up the cluster size when
I re-do the XP install (was 4k... I think), if so, does
bigger = better (have a 120GB SATA drive and a 60GB Ultra
somethingorother drive).

Thanks for your time.

Harry
 
J

John Kelly

Hi there,

There is a comparison chart somewhere on Microsoft that illustrates what I
will try to explain clearly in as few words as possible..:))
If the average size of you files was slightly less than 4KB then the cluster
size would need to be 4KB. If your average file size is in MegaBytes AND you
had 4KB clusters and remembering that each cluster has a "From" field at its
beginning and a "To" field at the end then you would need a huge amount of
clusters just to store this one file. Because of the extra data in the
clusters each cluster actually holds less than 4KB of your file...and that's
why you often see that the file occupies X KB + Y KB when the file is
actually only X KB. The file seems bigger than it really is.

And the opposite occurs if your average file size is quite small but your
cluster size is set to 64KB...imagine a 1KB file sitting in a cluster of
64KB. a cluster will only ever hold one file or one part of a file...so a
few small files take up a LARGE amount of disk space.

My C Drive is set at 16KB I think and my D and E drives are both set at
64KB...because they both hold very large files.

With real time (or as near as possible real time) writing to a hard drive
where the file size is going to be large then cluster sizes of 64KB are
preferable. There is less management of the data that keeps track of where
the next cluster is and so on leaving more time for the actual "write to
disk"

I hope this helps a little.
--
Best Wishes.....John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
\|||/
(o o)
----------ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------

¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º
And if it should come to pass that our dreams come true, what then of our
nightmares?
 
H

Harry

John

Thanks -- that makes sense, I'll try something similar.

Just trying to "get it right" this time -- my old config
was driving me crazy, as I had chickened out on the NTFS
conversion when I up-graded from ME to XP, since it was
described as a one-way-street, however, after about a
year in the XP/FAT32 mode, defragging became a nearly
endless process (about 10 hours for a half-full 60GB
drive)... maybe it was the combination of
XP/FAT32/largefiles that gave my drive its fatal heart
attack.

Harry
-----Original Message-----
Hi there,

There is a comparison chart somewhere on
Microsoft that illustrates what I
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top