Skip navigation

Lightweight OS

Feb 10, 2011 7:32 AM

  Latest reply: Noel Carboni, Feb 21, 2011 10:11 AM
Replies 1 2 3 2 Previous Next
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 18, 2011 3:51 PM   in reply to Hudechrome
    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

    Hudechrome wrote:


    I assume if I want to disable the operation, I could either go into the Edit and disable it or change the Registry entry to -0-


    The Group Policy Editor actually exposes 3 states:  Enabled, Disabled, and Not Configured.  I'll bet you can guess what the third one does to the registry value. 

     

    And they all three have different meanings.  Seek out the documentation for Group Policy to see how that works.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 20, 2011 7:28 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    It appears that operations in PS have increased in speed markedly. Also, the amount of free memory showing in the resource manager has increased dramatically, even after a memory intensive operation. Previously, I would se 150 to 250MB free, standby being quite large, and now it's 3 to 4Gb free, and the Standby has shrunk, but the total physical memory has increased from 20 to 25% to 37% at the moment.

     

    I also noted that the total video memory is about 3 to 4x the installed physical memory on the video card. I haven't paid attention to thet number before so I have no reference.

     

    At any rate, it's lightning fast now. I didn't see the HD active during the Photomerge test.I gave 93% Memory usage to PS and I see no hangups.

     

    Can all this be due to the cessation of indexing? If so, everybody needs to know this and how to do it. If not, WTF is going on? No complaints, mind you but curious minds want to know!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 21, 2011 2:34 AM   in reply to Hudechrome
    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

    Hudechrome wrote:


    Can all this be due to the cessation of indexing?


    I believe so, yes.

     

    Windows 7 Indexing is a poor implementation of a bad idea, and you lose nothing but perhaps a little search time when you actually NEED to search.  That can be offset by creating an excellent disk drive setup.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 21, 2011 7:40 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I haven't noticed a drop in search speeds, but I haven't paid much attention either. Back when I started using XP, I did an experiment first doing a search without Indexing, then after some time elapsed, tried it again. I saw no evidence indexing was useful but did see that, especially the beginning of indexing operations, other programs slowed down. So I abandoned it.

     

    Creating an excellent disk drive setup. Like what?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 21, 2011 10:11 AM   in reply to Hudechrome
    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

    Hudechrome wrote:


    Creating an excellent disk drive setup. Like what?

     

    Like a high throughput RAID arrangement, for example, made of fast drives with big caches.  And (assuming good battery backup) disabling Windows 7 write flushing so applications can run through disk write operations at RAM speed, and the OS can have the freedom to schedule disk operations in an order that makes sense.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 3 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points