deeppal Posted September 23, 2005 Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 Is disk cache gonna be implemented or not later on? Coz it can really be a strain on the hardisk without disk cache to sort the pieces.Yes i read ur other thread that u commented that windows has an inbuilt disk cache that checks the data, but windows wasnt configured for heavy amount of traffic going in and out by torrenting. And there must be a reason why major clients have that feature. If it just took up mem usage and ram, many people would not prefer having a bit buggy client rather than one without disk cache. Just stating my pt . Thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vurlix Posted September 23, 2005 Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?p=542#542 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 23, 2005 Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 the disk cache function seems useful ONLY for massive download speed (>500 ko or even 1 MB/sec !) as it's stated in bitcomet presentation for instance :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Intelligent Disk Cache is designed for fast downloaders. When uploads or download rate exceeds 500kB/s or even more than 1MB/s, a carefully designed disk cache mechanism in BitComet will greatly improved the hard-disk performance by decrease the read and write frequency of your hard disk. So that the life time of hard disk can be longer. Some statistics of the operation of the cache is avaliable in the Log View, e.g. HitRatio, Read/Write Requrest Frequence, Actual Disk Read/Write Frequence, where one can easiliy find out the improvement.'------------------------------------------------------------------------------I don't know how many users reach regularly these ultrasonic speeds with torrents but I'm not one of those :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeppal Posted September 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 Yes dude i understand but that doesnt mean the hardisk is not going tru bombardment checking pieces and data when u downloading many torrents. Windows is not designed for this. U really need disk caching with very high speeds but that does not mean it does not help with low speeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 23, 2005 Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 Windows is not designed for this. U really need disk caching with very high speeds but that does not mean it does not help with low speeds.Sure, that's why decent HD drives have 8MB cache Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeppal Posted September 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2005 Yap i know , but it would be nice to have some protection over the hardisks instead of using them day in day out for huge amounts of traffic.But u guys might know better. I just felt it might put less strain on the hardisk.Thx for ur comments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 24, 2005 Report Share Posted September 24, 2005 Writing data to disk is what disk drives are for; I think you'd have to be doing some truly awful thrashing to your disk for quite a long time to have a noticable effect on its life.Since Windows NT 3.x, way back in the early 90s, all versions of Windows have included extremely aggressive and advanced disk caching. The cache automatically grows to consume all available RAM, when useful, and automatically shrinks to allow programs to load, when needed.The "Performance" tab on Windows Task Manager will show you the size of the Windows disk cache; right now, mine is 291MB. I don't see how adding a few MB of uTorrent disk cache is going to help much. I've wondered why other BT clients (like Azureus) have independent disk caches - it doesn't make sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 24, 2005 Report Share Posted September 24, 2005 the disk cache function seems useful ONLY for massive download speed (>500 ko or even 1 MB/sec !)I don't know how many users reach regularly these ultrasonic speeds with torrents but I'm not one of those :shock:I do, on my fave private tracker I achieve >600Kbyte/sec with boring regularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgeek560 Posted September 24, 2005 Report Share Posted September 24, 2005 I'm from bulgaria and we have very fast tracker - it's normal to d/u with more than 1MB/s, even with 5-8MB/s.so I tryed the 1.1 build and when the first torrent passes the 1MB I get the "Windows out of virtual memory" message. I closed all my windows and checked Task manager - utorrent was using more than 100MB and was increasing. The HDD was very noisy - I think because there was a lot of random reading and writing on it. And after a while the torrent eventualy crashed (but hasn't been able to make dump). After the rehash nearly half of what was downloaded was gone. When the speed reached 1MB again the memory usage starts increasing again this time slower. I paused until the HDD calms down and after that every thing became normal. The speed reaches 1.4MB/s but this time without the memory problem.I can't tell what the problem was but i assume the main reason could be hardware slowness and because of it, Windows (or the client) start caching the unwritten data into the RAM.If this is the problem maybe there should be some kind of chek whether the downloaded data is written or storred in the RAM...P.S. I don't have such problems with the other client (BitComet) that I use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ludde Posted September 24, 2005 Report Share Posted September 24, 2005 bgeek560,Can you go into the Help menu and select Debug Info...Ctrl-C the stuff in there and paste it plz.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgeek560 Posted September 24, 2005 Report Share Posted September 24, 2005 ---------------------------µTorrent---------------------------Size of disk queue: 0# Incoming conns: 0# Outgoing conns: 65Free network buffers: 0/17---------------------------OK --------------------------- this s the current but when I checked it when it was downloading Free network buffers: 39/320 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgeek560 Posted September 25, 2005 Report Share Posted September 25, 2005 ---------------------------µTorrent---------------------------Size of disk queue: 59# Incoming conns: 75# Outgoing conns: 400Free network buffers: 43/306---------------------------OK ---------------------------here is debug info when I was downloading from 50 peers with 1.4MB/s (these are peak values disk queue was around 0-8 most of the times) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.