Re: I`m getting annoyed...
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:48:42 +0700, Syafril Hermansyah wrote: [] From the fact above, you can see 1. if our Harddisk Space performance OK, it will help performance of our Windows. 2. if we always keep our HDD "healthy" (by defragment regularly etc), we will minimize probability of file error because of "hdd cluster link error". 3. if we can have good Virtual Memory Management, we can run more application concurrently, without crash or file corrupt. Win9x seems to crash more often when having to use a lot of virtual memory and hence do a lot of swapping. A major step towards reasonable windows stability and reliability is to add more RAM. I've personally noted that win98 systems in my neighborhood are a lot more stable than before and this is most likely because the machines today come with at least 32MB of memory. In fact 64MB seems to be the standard. On top of that win98 is inherently more stable than it's predecessors. To minimize fragmenting in the system partition, in my last win98 days, I had moved all temp files and confined V Swapping to one partition and then defragged that partition regularly. This and 64MB of RAM at the time reduced crashes to a bearable minimum. :) -- Ali Martin | Using The Bat! v1.38e mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Windows NT 4.0 (Service Pack 6) [ I do this kind of stuff to him all through the picture. ] -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
OT: Tweaking our PC {Was :Re: I`m getting annoyed...}
Hello Ali Martin, On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 at 07:38:35 [GMT -0500] your local time which was Monday, December 27, 1999 19:38:35 [GMT +0700] my local time, you told to the list: AM [] From the fact above, you can see 1. if our Harddisk Space performance OK, it will help performance of our Windows. 2. if we always keep our HDD "healthy" (by defragment regularly etc), we will minimize probability of file error because of "hdd cluster link error". 3. if we can have good Virtual Memory Management, we can run more application concurrently, without crash or file corrupt. AM Win9x seems to crash more often when having to use a lot of AM virtual memory and hence do a lot of swapping. A major step AM towards reasonable windows stability and reliability is to add AM more RAM. I've personally noted that win98 systems in my AM neighborhood are a lot more stable than before and this is most AM likely because the machines today come with at least 32MB of AM memory. In fact 64MB seems to be the standard. On top of that AM win98 is inherently more stable than it's predecessors. Agree. According to Wintune, to have better "memory management", we can set our PC as "Network Server" (or something like that) instead of "Desktop/Stand Alone". In regard to amount of RAM, IMHO depending also the chipset of our Motherboard. For TX, VX chipset, 64 MB is the best, more than that tend the system going slow, because the Cache RAM not support more than 64 MB; that's why for server always use HX or BX chipset. AM To minimize fragmenting in the system partition, in my last win98 AM days, I had moved all temp files and confined V Swapping to one AM partition and then defragged that partition regularly. This and AM 64MB of RAM at the time reduced crashes to a bearable minimum. :) Oops I don't know if Win98 can set the swap in other disk as NT did. -- - syafril - Name: Syafril Hermansyah | Company : Duta Integrasi Pratama Mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Voice : (62) (21) 385-1600 URL : www.dutaint.co.id | FAX : (62) (21) 351-9241 I am using The Bat! 1.38e (reg) under Windows NT Workstation 4.0 built 1381, Service Pack 6 Created : Monday, December 27, 1999, 19:54:43 (GMT + 07:00) -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: OT: Tweaking our PC {Was :Re: I`m getting annoyed...}
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 20:02:55 +0700, Syafril Hermansyah wrote: [] According to Wintune, to have better "memory management", we can set our PC as "Network Server" (or something like that) instead of "Desktop/Stand Alone". Yes, that's right. I had used that setting as well. It's been such a long time since really using win98. My wife has win98 installed on her machine but I don't really do much with it personally. It's yet to crash after 4 months. Hmmm. :)) In regard to amount of RAM, IMHO depending also the chipset of our Motherboard. For TX, VX chipset, 64 MB is the best, more than that tend the system going slow, because the Cache RAM not support more than 64 MB; that's why for server always use HX or BX chipset. AFAIK, the system doesn't get slower per se when you exceed the 64MB limit with cacheable RAM using the TX and VX chipsets. It's just that the performance increase with adding more RAM is not as good as with chipsets that allow caching of RAM above 64MB. When I had upgraded from 64MB to 128MB of RAM on my previous motherboard which used a VX chipset, their was definite performance increases. AM To minimize fragmenting in the system partition, in my last win98 AM days, I had moved all temp files and confined V Swapping to one AM partition and then defragged that partition regularly. This and AM 64MB of RAM at the time reduced crashes to a bearable minimum. :) Oops I don't know if Win98 can set the swap in other disk as NT did. I did this with win95 OSR2. I went into the system properties, hit the performance tab and then hit the 'virtual memory' button. You will then see that in the virtual memory settings applet there is a choice to let you specify your own virtual memory settings. You may then tell how much swap space may be used on each partition. I turned down all partitions to zero except one which I had set to a comfortable figure. I see that in win98 these settings are still very much present. :) Of course I'd advise that you do this at your own risk and if things go wrong, reboot to safe mode and reverse the changes. If you are more adventurous fiddle until a workable setting is achieved. I don't know how win98 is in this regard. I never tried it. -- Ali Martin | Using The Bat! v1.38e mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Windows NT 4.0 (Service Pack 6) [ Reformat Hard Drive! Are you SURE (Y/Y)? ] -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: I`m getting annoyed...
Sunday, December 26, 1999, 11:48:42 PM, Syafril wrote: From the fact above, you can see You forgot #4. #4: Since HD speeds are measured in ms and RAM in ns HDs are a magnitude slower than RAM. Therefore hitting swap is *bad*. With RAM hovering around $1.25/Meg it is better to get more RAM and stay within it than to "tweak" HD and live with swap. Can you see the relation now ? Nope. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: I`m getting annoyed...
Monday, December 27, 1999, 4:38:35 AM, Ali wrote: stable than before and this is most likely because the machines today come with at least 32MB of memory. In fact 64MB seems to be the standard. On top of that win98 is inherently more stable than it's predecessors. Ever wonder why the prebuilts put so little RAM in their computers? Because when the computers hit swap, they slow down. The normal end consumer sees the machine slow and pulls out the tired car analogy. "Well, if the CPU is the engine, if I want to go faster I need to get a faster engine. I need a faster CPU!" At which time they dutifully trade in their PII-300 w/24Mb RAM (I've seen it!) for a spiffy new PIII-600 with. 32Mb RAM! In about a year they repeat the process. Personally my work and home workstations both have 128Mb of RAM. Swap? What's that? One is NT, one is 98. My Linux server has 64Mb in it and it only touches swap every once and a while. Want to know a secret? My Linux box could take up to 128Mb and its MB is years old. It has a P5-100 in it that I bought before the PIIs came out. My workstation, a Celeron-400a, has a MB that can accommodate 768Mb. The single cheapest and easiest way to speed up a machine is to put more RAM into it. MBs these days can take up .7-1Gb of RAM. So why is 32Mb-64Mb "standard"? ;) To minimize fragmenting in the system partition, in my last win98 days, I had moved all temp files and confined V Swapping to one partition and then defragged that partition regularly. This and 64MB of RAM at the time reduced crashes to a bearable minimum. :) Try 128Mb and no swapping. I have crashed from other areas, but that is most likely from my sound card being an original AWE-32 with two 256kb SIMMs that I bought new just for that card. ;) -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: I`m getting annoyed...
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:31:27 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: [] The single cheapest and easiest way to speed up a machine is to put more RAM into it. MBs these days can take up .7-1Gb of RAM. So why is 32Mb-64Mb "standard"? ;) When I said standard, I mean that a basic, standard, prebuilt machine comes preloaded with 64MB of memory and win98. That's all. :) To minimize fragmenting in the system partition, in my last win98 days, I had moved all temp files and confined V Swapping to one partition and then defragged that partition regularly. This and 64MB of RAM at the time reduced crashes to a bearable minimum. :) Try 128Mb and no swapping. I have crashed from other areas, but that is most likely from my sound card being an original AWE-32 with two 256kb SIMMs that I bought new just for that card. ;) I have been using 128MB of RAM for nearly four years, so I have been unto your little secret for a long time. :) It's also time to upgrade, since VMWare Linux is stressing the system. :) -- Ali Martin | Using The Bat! v1.38e mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Windows NT 4.0 (Service Pack 6) [ Best file compression around: "DEL *.*" - 100% compression. ] -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: I`m getting annoyed...
Monday, December 27, 1999, 8:45:59 AM, Syafril wrote: Question : Mail Client is Compute Bound or I/O bound from your point of view ? Neither. Mind you I ran a Fido BBS when I was 16 on a 386sx-16, 2Mb RAM and a 40MBb IDE drive. Nothing like tossing a few thousand messages a day from Fido, a few thousand a day from usenet and handling the email for a few hundred users. I seriously doubt anyone in here can top the requirements of a BBS in the high time of BBSing. That machine wasn't eithe IO or CPU bound so neither is anyone's machine when it comes to email. CPU/IO bound is someone trying to keep up a full newsfeed with cross-propagation the end result of which is a single machine processing news that fills a full T1 24/7. Only then (or more extreme cases) will I consider something bound by CPU/IO or other such factors. -- Steve, smacking his gums and wishing the whipper-snappers would all go away. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re[2]: I`m getting annoyed...
Hello Steve Lamb, On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:31:27 -0800 GMT your local time, which was Monday, December 27, 1999, 11:31:27 PM (GMT+0700) my local time, Steve Lamb wrote: Steve Monday, December 27, 1999, 4:38:35 AM, Ali wrote: stable than before and this is most likely because the machines today come with at least 32MB of memory. In fact 64MB seems to be the standard. On top of that win98 is inherently more stable than it's predecessors. Steve Ever wonder why the prebuilts put so little RAM in their computers? Steve Because when the computers hit swap, they slow down. The normal end consumer Steve sees the machine slow and pulls out the tired car analogy. "Well, if the CPU Steve is the engine, if I want to go faster I need to get a faster engine. I need a Steve faster CPU!" At which time they dutifully trade in their PII-300 w/24Mb RAM Steve (I've seen it!) for a spiffy new PIII-600 with. 32Mb RAM! In about a year Steve they repeat the process. Not the ONLY reason, they also compete on price and if its cheaper with a bit less ram most consumers go for the cheapest. Same with having that silly onboard video using system ram. As computers where I live die quick anyway we tend to let people bring their box in and we show them what it does by adding ram. Free of charge... Almost nobody wants us to remove it again... Take a nice old 486 and add a lot of ram and see it fly... My kids run a P75 with 64 mb and windows 95, runs as fast as many p133's or faster. Steve Personally my work and home workstations both have 128Mb of RAM. Swap? Steve What's that? One is NT, one is 98. My Linux server has 64Mb in it and it Steve only touches swap every once and a while. Mine run 256 and you need it for some things. If you run heavy duty gaming or graphic work, start at 256 mb... In my own case the main reason I had a lot of ram was internet, to make use of the lousy and expensive capcity I had, I went for enough ram to be able to run double/tripple ftps up and down, have a news reader running and my mail and if required a mpeg movie for my son. My modem was normally running flat out as I just kept adding tasks till it was optimum. I cannot do that anymore as my current isp is cutting us off very often so I would use the lot but before that it sure worked. Steve Want to know a secret? Steve My Linux box could take up to 128Mb and its MB is years old. It has a Steve P5-100 in it that I bought before the PIIs came out. My workstation, a Steve Celeron-400a, has a MB that can accommodate 768Mb. Steve The single cheapest and easiest way to speed up a machine is to put more Steve RAM into it. MBs these days can take up .7-1Gb of RAM. So why is 32Mb-64Mb Steve "standard"? ;) Mainly price as it was very difficult to sell extra ram at prices it was a few years ago. Enough ram could double the pc price. MY machine had a lot more ram since years, it runs so much better/faster. 98 needs about 64 MINIMUM to run and from what I heard about windows 2000 it needs at least 256. Also in my experience, the faster the machine the more ram you need to get rid of that hard disk bottle neck Steve mentoned. To minimize fragmenting in the system partition, in my last win98 days, I had moved all temp files and confined V Swapping to one partition and then defragged that partition regularly. This and 64MB of RAM at the time reduced crashes to a bearable minimum. :) I had a small scsi drive (one of those fast ones) just for swapping... Steve Try 128Mb and no swapping. I have crashed from other areas, but that is Steve most likely from my sound card being an original AWE-32 with two 256kb SIMMs Steve that I bought new just for that card. ;) you couldnt get the proper ram?? (g) I just spend most of the day trying to figure out why my celeron 300A running at 450 was running slower and slower.. Lucky the hardware cooperated and the half dead ram chip died. believe me, my 98 was a snail with just 32 mb instead of its 256 mb. I just hope that was all as I donot want to buy new ram, too expensive! Anyway as Steve says, you want more speed, add ram, its the cheapest way to upgrade in many ways, depending obviously on the age of the system... I wouldnt go off and buy simms!! Best regards, tracer Using theBAT 1.38e mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: I`m getting annoyed...
Monday, December 27, 1999, 9:56:45 AM, tracer wrote: Same with having that silly onboard video using system ram. Funny thing is take a look at what AGP boards use for their frame buffer. ;) In my own case the main reason I had a lot of ram was internet, to make use of the lousy and expensive capcity I had, I went for enough ram to be able to run double/tripple ftps up and down, have a news reader running and my mail and if required a mpeg movie for my son. Gah, all of that is what, 16Mb? Oh, wait, sorry, thinking Linux again. SLRN, newsreader, ~2Mb. lftp, ftp client, ~1.5Mb (can do multiple connections) MP3 in X, 12Mb. Mainly price as it was very difficult to sell extra ram at prices it was a few years ago. Enough ram could double the pc price. Yeah, years ago. I was still in that mindset until I got my C400a so I could keep up with the games. 64Mb of RAM w/tax and SH cost me a whopping $89. That is when RAM prices were (are?) supposed to be "high". 98 needs about 64 MINIMUM to run and from what I heard about windows 2000 it needs at least 256. Also in my experience, the faster the machine the more ram you need to get rid of that hard disk bottle neck Steve mentoned. If that is the case it is completely unacceptable. Jeez, I can get Linux to boot and run doing much more work than Windows in under 2Mb w/o touching swap. Hell, the most useful computing device I bought recently for real *work* was my Palm IIIe with a whopping 2Mb. What is MS' problem? I had a small scsi drive (one of those fast ones) just for swapping... total used free sharedbuffers cached Mem: 63348 60396 2952 19828 21664 18840 -/+ buffers/cache: 19892 43456 Swap: 132072 3100 128972 I just avoid the problem. I think the 3.1Mb of swap is from the PMMail list I host hammering my system. If I limited exim to 25 copies instead of 50 I'd not touch swap at all. you couldnt get the proper ram?? (g) That was the proper RAM. The AWE32 had two SIMM slots for an expanded memory buffer for synth sound files. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re[2]: I`m getting annoyed...
Hello Syafril Hermansyah, On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 23:45:59 +0700 GMT your local time, which was Monday, December 27, 1999, 11:45:59 PM (GMT+0700) my local time, Syafril Hermansyah wrote: Syafril Sometimes there is a condition that we must replace motherboard to Syafril upgrade our RAM such: no more slots, we use old fashioned Motherboard Syafril etc. Syafril Then, if you look at the link I mentioned, the tweaking of IDE UDMA Syafril drive very useful and more cheap than change to SCSI drive. This will Syafril help much for I/O bound application (like Mail Server etc). But will your old boards make proper use of the UDMA? Donot forget that SCSI also takes a lot of work away from the processor. I have an old 486 with scsi running a cdrom burner You can play mpegs on a 2 speed scsi cdrom. I had 2 old plextors nobody wanted in a shop and I stuck them in a machine with a spare scsi card, and it plays the movies/games etc. That 'old ' scsi stuff is way better in many ways then the ide's everybody buys. One of the reasons I recently send an old scsi card to a friend in the USA as it was one of those old cards (you remember the 3 slots). That whole office had a scsi card, cd rom and hard disk in all machines and they ran as stable as you might want. Syafril Question : Mail Client is Compute Bound or I/O bound from your point Syafril of view ? Modem bound I would say, processor bound with the wrong modem (like win-modem) Or with a lot of data on old boards port bound (I used an ESP card for my modem, and I still have it but no drivers for 98. It will handle 800k/sec...) In general with older boards you may be better off with internal modems as they have the higher speed ports included. Syafril How come ? So, what do you think/view about mailbox corrupt ? Can have many reasons, maybe not enough ram, badly running windows. The more things are split up the more chances on problems. Sofar they never corrupted in my machine. I havent seen any description of system involved but believe me, I crashed while boxes are open BUT I always run the scan disk/equivalent after to boot to sort the obvious mess out and fix it by deleting whatever is conflicting. Best regards, tracer Using theBAT 1.38e mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: I`m getting annoyed...
Hello Adam Golebiowski, On Fri, 24 Dec 1999 at 15:35:53 [GMT +0100] your local time which was Friday, December 24, 1999 21:35:53 [GMT +0700] my local time, you told to the list: SH What's your O/S ? AG It`s WIN 98 SH After tweaking my PC, The Bat! startup and exit more faster ! AG but what`s the relations with broken msb??? Some fact: - if we run more application, windows needs more memory. - if physical memory not enough, windows automatically create virtual memory. - in WinNT, Virtual Memory is static (we must set manually) not as Win95/98 which is dynamically assign by O/S. From the fact above, you can see 1. if our Harddisk Space performance OK, it will help performance of our Windows. 2. if we always keep our HDD "healthy" (by defragment regularly etc), we will minimize probability of file error because of "hdd cluster link error". 3. if we can have good Virtual Memory Management, we can run more application concurrently, without crash or file corrupt. Can you see the relation now ? -- - syafril - Name: Syafril Hermansyah | Company : Duta Integrasi Pratama Mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Voice : (62) (21) 385-1600 URL : www.dutaint.co.id | FAX : (62) (21) 351-9241 I am using The Bat! 1.38e (reg) under Windows NT Workstation 4.0 built 1381, Service Pack 6 Created : Monday, December 27, 1999, 14:35:54 (GMT + 07:00) -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
I`m getting annoyed...
Welcome, Damn, once again the bat informed me about broken message base... will it ever stops??? /Adam + [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.wkrotce.pl \ | "Chiquita" | IRC: G_ADam @#Zielonka #klub @#radiostacja| \ Gobiowski + PGP key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=SEND%20PGP / -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: I`m getting annoyed...
Hello Adam Golebiowski, On Fri, 24 Dec 1999 at 12:43:38 [GMT +0100], you told us: AG Damn, once again the bat informed me about broken message base... AG will it ever stops??? What's your O/S ? If you're using WinNT (Wst or Svr) and using UDMA IDE drive , I've tips : Tweak your NT, see links below : http://arstechnica.com/tweak/nt/pagefile-1.html After tweaking my PC, The Bat! startup and exit more faster ! -- - syafril - Name: Syafril Hermansyah | Company : Duta Integrasi Pratama Mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Voice : (62) (21) 385-1600 URL : www.dutaint.co.id | FAX : (62) (21) 351-9241 I am using The Bat! 1.38e (reg) under Windows NT Workstation 4.0 built 1381, Service Pack 6 Created : Friday, December 24, 1999, 19:23:23 (GMT + 07:00) -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re[2]: I`m getting annoyed...
Welcome, Syafril wrote: SH What's your O/S ? It`s WIN 98 SH After tweaking my PC, The Bat! startup and exit more faster ! but what`s the relations with broken msb??? /Adam + [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.wkrotce.pl \ | "Chiquita" | IRC: G_ADam @#Zielonka #klub @#radiostacja| \ Go³êbiowski + PGP key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=SEND%20PGP / -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --
