FredSam43 Posted December 10, 2011 Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 I've reported this in passing on some of the 3.1 betas but got no responce.I'm wondering if the disk cache is working as designed. In 3.0 (26473) it works as I would expect: the cache gathering up lots of cache writes into a few disk writes (it fills to, say, 6 Megs for each write burst):In 3.1(26595) the disk is kept busy (the cache stays at 0 bytes most of the time):I'm using idential settings:It seems to me that conbining fewer cache writes into disk writes (or equivalently doing many more disk writes) is going backwards on the "Disk I/O optimization" front. Am I missing something?If it matters I'm running Win 7 64-bit, 8 Gigs of ram, a SSD disk with 8 Gigs free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTHK Posted December 11, 2011 Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 My cache overshoots by a lot, but that's desirable compared to disk overloads.Mmmmmmmmmm couch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredSam43 Posted December 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2011 My cache overshoots by a lot, but that's desirable compared to disk overloads....Yeh, but in my case they threw the baby out with the bathwater: On my system there's no way for the old uTorrent to get a disk overload (the disk light would blink now and then with a saturated net) and the current code accesses my disk many time more (the disk light is continually blinking) whether or not I have the OS's cache also enabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.