Pwnage Posted March 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 FASTIO_READ are a lot less expensive on the system than normal reads, so it doesn't really matter how many reads they make. They're reading from the cache.That makes no sense, how is it less taxing of the system when it reads more and more, even if it reads from cache its still overreading. 1 million reads in alittle over an hour is excessive, dont you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anoxan Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 I wonder how many billion reads/writes my seagate has made since I installed it...a million reads/hour doesn't sound that excessive to menow if you'll excuse me, my hookah needs refilling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1c3d0g Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 I don't believe a hard disk's failure rate is measured in just reads/writes, but rather how long it has stayed online (MTBF - Mean Time Between Failure). Most hard disks have a MTBF of what, 100,000 hours? The Raptors have something like 1.2 million hours...so if you need reliability, that's where I'd put my money on. I'm excluding SCSI drives as not all of us can afford such gems... Edit: typo...sigh... :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Pwnage: because the reads are all fastio (cache) reads, which aren't really very expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Pwnage: http://web.archive.org/web/20031005043605/http://www.osr.com/ntinsider/1996/fastio.htmThis tight integration means that both read and write operations can often be satisfied from this cached data. In the search for performance, then, this fact can be exploited for read and write by simply calling a specialized routine which moves data from the VM cache into the user's memory, or vice versa. This eliminates the need to allocate an I/O request packet since the operation can be satisfied synchronously and need not call into lower drivers. It is this fundamental model which is realized by the fast I/O operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pwnage Posted March 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Pwnage: because the reads are all fastio (cache) reads, which aren't really very expensive.There still more expensive than no reads at all, now wouldnt you agree to that? Thats what i was trying to express. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Not really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pwnage Posted March 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 The new version dose even more reads, I dont even want to reinstall and take the screen shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 It doesn't matter. Cache reads don't matter.Winamp, on the other hand, performs a ton of non-cache reads (IRP_MJ_READ) and directory opens/closes, which is far, far worse than foobar2000. Unlike foobar2000's cache reads, these slow reads DO have an impact on the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pwnage Posted March 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 It doesn't matter. Cache reads don't matter.Winamp, on the other hand, performs a ton of non-cache reads (IRP_MJ_READ) and directory opens/closes, which is far, far worse than foobar2000. Unlike foobar2000's cache reads, these slow reads DO have an impact on the system.Other than you ive never heard anyone say that its far far worse... Wheres your proof for that, or are you just making stuff up, im just glad I didnt spend hours and hours trying to get my music player to look like a music player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 FASTIO_READ is from the system cache. IRP_MJ_READ is not, and is a fairly slow (relatively speaking) read from the disk. Winamp makes lots of those. About half the reads, actually. It also queries the plugins directory every second, making 4 IO calls every second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Pwnage, did you bother reading my post? Does reading from cache stored in RAM (FASTIO) sound expensive like reading from hard drive via IRP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pwnage Posted March 27, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 Is there any option to tone it down alittle I like using foobar, just dont like the hd ravaging. Are there any options? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 IT'S NOT RAVAGING YOUR HD. You didn't read anything I said. At all. It's reading from RAM (aka the Windows System Cache), not your HD! Winamp on the other hand, makes lots of reads direct from the HD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pwnage Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 So your saying that its better for the hard drive to run foobar than it is to run winamp? I know foobars a better player, but is it really better for the hard drive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 If Winamp really reads the file using IRP calls as often as foobar2000 reads from cache using FASTIO, then yes, it's probably more harmful than foobar2000 (and marginally at that), though I can't really prove that claim, since I'm not sure how damaging and expensive the calls really are to the hard drive either. Just a guess based on what I'm understanding so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 It might, but in reality, I don't think it'll make a significant differnce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.