Author Topic: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon  (Read 29287 times)

roberto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Karma: +3/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #30 on: February 01, 2023, 03:35:59 pm »
Hi Remy
This is a laptoop, and I have no option of any kind of configuring video in bios.

But do it about 4096 if I can tell you a curious case:
The Standard Diskcache = D, LW
The coherent would be diskcache = 4096, lw or 2048
The configured diskcache = 4096000, LW

Any number greater than 4096000 did not work for me, any smaller number did not work either.
Copies to Fat32 from computer to USB Stick, accelerate by 4 or 5 times in less time.
(Sure of the numbers that I provide)

And if everything fails you already know, call the system administrator.
Saludos

roberto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Karma: +3/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #31 on: February 02, 2023, 06:18:34 pm »

The configured diskcache = 4096000, LW

I answer myself because I keep asking questions:
4096000/125 = 32768 Surprise is an integer.
And it won't it be a frequency in diskcache?
And I have tried the FAT32 and I changed 2048 for 2000 and
The IFS of HPFS 2048 for 2000, and new surprise I can copy from the USB stick to the hard drive, with FC2.40 and FC2.50, the arcaos-5.0.7 in four minutes, instead of a long hour, which came out With the Laser Commander.
FC2.40 and FC2.50 are closed at the end of the copy, it requires being attentive to see the final result, because it does not calculate the times well, and it appears as if the copy would be slower, but it ends it correct and rapid.
Before I could only copy the USB stick from the computer, but now I can also do it on the contrary.
The copied file for this test is:
14/01/23 19:15    1.515.440 K      0 a---  ArcaOS-5.0.7.iso
With the IFS of the JFS, I do not dare to experiment, that I leave it to you.

Saludos

roberto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Karma: +3/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #32 on: February 06, 2023, 10:58:22 am »
With reference to Fat32 Cache, the information provided was incomplete, how strange no one is tested
This would be the right thing:
REM IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:2048 /h /q /ac:* /largefiles
IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:4000 /q /ac:* /largefiles
REM CALL=C:\OS2\CACHEF32.EXE /f /p:2 /m:50000 /b:250 /d:5000 /S

If the second cache is not canceled, the computer does not start, with a trap in Fat32, or similar failure.
Another question may be that program is the most appropriate to make copies.

Also where I say:
AFTER  ramdisk 512mb and and modify the config.sys changing the swapper to that newly created partition
I should say:
AFTER  ramdisk 512mb (The swappath gives the same where you put it)

saludos

Andi B.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +11/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #33 on: February 06, 2023, 01:35:09 pm »
Code: [Select]
[quote author=roberto link=topic=3232.msg38169#msg38169 date=1675677502]
With reference to Fat32 Cache, the information provided was incomplete, how strange no one is tested
Don't understand what you mean. Do you think someone should try to reproduce your measurements? Then maybe one problem is you're hard to understand. At least I can't follow what you're saying most of the time.

Quote
This would be the right thing:
REM IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:2048 /h /q /ac:* /largefiles
IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:4000 /q /ac:* /largefiles
REM CALL=C:\OS2\CACHEF32.EXE /f /p:2 /m:50000 /b:250 /d:5000 /S

If the second cache is not canceled, the computer does not start, with a trap in Fat32, or similar failure.
What is 'the second cache'? What should be 'canceled'? Do you mean you have to rem out the call to cachef32.exe otherwise it traps?

'with a trap in Fat32, or similar failure' - what? Trap or not? At bootup or later? Which trap? Or similar?

Quote
Another question may be that program is the most appropriate to make copies.
No clue what you want to say with this. As there is no question mark it seems you make a statement here which I don't understand.

Quote
Also where I say: ......
Sorry, maybe my English is to bad but most of the time I can't follow what you're trying to say.

Question - do you have a setting for FAT32 line in config.sys which you have measured considerable faster transfer rate? Please provide old (slow) line and new (fast) config.sys line. And you measured it (both the same of course) and tell us the speed (MBytes/s or 1 file mit xxx MByte took yyy seconds). Thanks.

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1562
  • Karma: +18/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #34 on: February 06, 2023, 06:54:52 pm »
Hi Andi,

I'm English and like you I don't understand what he is rabbiting on about.  I also don't see what he is trying to gain with all the messing about he does after all 'if it works why change anything' is the rule I worked under before my retirement, nearly 30 years ago, and still do today.

I would be nice if he explained what he is trying the achieve but that seems to be some nebulous goal without any real reasoning.

roberto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Karma: +3/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2023, 09:07:33 pm »
It is about being able to make a copy from a USB Stick, from a 1.5GB file to the computer, in reasonable spread, between 7 to 12 minutes, with the standard configuration takes 60 to 65 minutes.
But not only that, it means that my frequency theory for CACHE, swappath, works, in a visible way.

Your standard config.sys 
Quote
IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:2048 /h /q /ac:* /largefiles
CALL=C:\OS2\CACHEF32.EXE /f /p:2 /m:50000 /b:250 /d:5000 /S

swappath=C:\os2\system\ 2048 2048
My experimental proposal
Quote
IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:2000 /h /q /ac:* /largefiles
rem CALL=C:\OS2\CACHEF32.EXE /f /p:2 /m:50000 /b:250 /d:5000 /S

swappath=L:\ 2000 409600

Provisted screen in Memory ON (I don't know if it will be necessary or not.)
Quote
If the second cache is not canceled, the computer does not start, with a trap in Fat32, or similar failure.
What is 'the second cache'?
cachef32.exe

Quote
What should be 'canceled'? Do you mean you have to rem out the call to cachef32.exe otherwise it traps?
yes, trap with fat32 or On another computer I showed me a complete black screen and stopped the start.


Quote
Quote
Another question may be that program is the most appropriate to make copies.
No clue what you want to say with this. As there is no question mark it seems you make a statement here which I don't understand.
I mean FC2 2.40 closes when the copy ends, 7 to 12 minutes, although it reflects times similar to the standard, while copying 60 minutes, but ends it before.
Other possible programs would be Copy, Xcopy, Laser Commander WPS etc ...

Quote
Question - do you have a setting for FAT32 line in config.sys which you have measured considerable faster transfer rate? Please provide old (slow) line and new (fast) config.sys line. And you measured it (both the same of course) and tell us the speed (MBytes/s or 1 file mit xxx MByte took yyy seconds). Thanks.
The file is
14/01/23 19:15    1.515.440 K      0 a---  ArcaOS-5.0.7.iso
The copy from pc to usb stick is in 4 minutes with the disk cache proposed before.
With this proposal is the opposite, copying it from USB stick to HD
saludos

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1562
  • Karma: +18/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #36 on: February 07, 2023, 06:27:00 am »
Hi roberto,

Without knowing what USB stick you are using there can not be any real comments made - not all USB sticks are made equal, some are better quality than others.  I have no problems copying a 2.7 GB ISO file to or from a USB stick in less than 2 minutes on one stick but it takes 4 minutes on another.

When you do tests you should give all the information about the test, make and model USB stick, imf you tried the same test with another brand of USB stick, What is the hardware for the USB- is it native mode or a pass through from a USB v3 controller, and so on.  All those things make a bigger difference to copy speed than messing about with the config.sys settings.

Remy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
  • Karma: +9/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #37 on: February 07, 2023, 02:33:34 pm »
Hi roberto,

Without knowing what USB stick you are using there can not be any real comments made - not all USB sticks are made equal, some are better quality than others.  I have no problems copying a 2.7 GB ISO file to or from a USB stick in less than 2 minutes on one stick but it takes 4 minutes on another.

When you do tests you should give all the information about the test, make and model USB stick, imf you tried the same test with another brand of USB stick, What is the hardware for the USB- is it native mode or a pass through from a USB v3 controller, and so on.  All those things make a bigger difference to copy speed than messing about with the config.sys settings.

Like Roberto,

Using usb sticks (USB2 or USB3 or above high speed up to above 300BiB/s  (up to 420MiB under win10)
But not only, writting to FAT32 partition on a disk takes long, very long with a speed less than 1MiB !!! (nearly 300TiB fat32 partition)

roberto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Karma: +3/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #38 on: February 07, 2023, 03:54:18 pm »
Hi Ivan
Without knowing what USB stick you are using there can not be any real comments made - .
The port is a USB 3.0, with a 32GB micro SD, from the Kingston brand, EHCI.
But I have done it with the same SD and the same port, just changing the config.Sys the file to copy the same.

saludos

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1562
  • Karma: +18/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #39 on: February 08, 2023, 08:00:00 pm »
As far as I know that SD card requires an SD to USB adapter to allow it to be used as a USB device.  There is your first problem - those adapters are not the fastest way of reading SD cards via USB.

Try again with a real USB stick, something like a Philips 32 Gb unit and see what your timing is then.  As an aside, the USB chipset of the computer also has some input to the speed of inserted USB sticks.

Andi B.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +11/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #40 on: February 08, 2023, 08:12:15 pm »
I only would test with an USB3 harddisk. Fastest are the 3,5" ones. But for FAT32 test every disk should be fast enough. Sticks are so different and sometimes transfer rate starts with high speed but drops afterwards -> unusable for comparison tests.

Dave Yeo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4823
  • Karma: +101/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #41 on: February 08, 2023, 11:59:55 pm »
As far as I know that SD card requires an SD to USB adapter to allow it to be used as a USB device.  There is your first problem - those adapters are not the fastest way of reading SD cards via USB.

Try again with a real USB stick, something like a Philips 32 Gb unit and see what your timing is then.  As an aside, the USB chipset of the computer also has some input to the speed of inserted USB sticks.

My fastest USB device, ignoring the HD, was a SD card using a converter.
Most of these USB sticks seem like crap, super slow with FAT32 and not faster with JFS.

Dave Yeo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4823
  • Karma: +101/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #42 on: February 09, 2023, 12:09:08 am »
With reference to Fat32 Cache, the information provided was incomplete, how strange no one is tested
This would be the right thing:
REM IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:2048 /h /q /ac:* /largefiles
IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:4000 /q /ac:* /largefiles
REM CALL=C:\OS2\CACHEF32.EXE /f /p:2 /m:50000 /b:250 /d:5000 /S

If the second cache is not canceled, the computer does not start, with a trap in Fat32, or similar failure.
Another question may be that program is the most appropriate to make copies.

Also where I say:
AFTER  ramdisk 512mb and and modify the config.sys changing the swapper to that newly created partition
I should say:
AFTER  ramdisk 512mb (The swappath gives the same where you put it)

saludos

Did you think to check what CACHEF32 does? Along with caching, it also does the unicode translation. Remove it and create a file with umlauts or such, put it back and you get crashes, same if you shared the stick, might even crash Windows, though they probably protect against it.
What you might want to do is turn off lazy writing, which some say really helps with USB sticks and the ramdisk. From \sys\book\fat32.inf, under CACHEF32,
Code: [Select]
/L:ON|OFF Sets lazy writing ON or OFF (default is ON).
And also from the same inf, under System-critical files and booting,
Code: [Select]
It is not possible to place the OS/2 swapfile (SWAPPER.DAT) on a FAT32 volume.
So it seems that you are using the default swap file in \os2
HPFS would work for the swap file on the ram disk, JFS maybe with some screwing around if the ram disk is preserved during a warm boot, one boot to format the disk JFS and a reboot to put the swap file there.
Edit: You should backup your FAT32 volumes, format and with CACHEF32 installed, restore. The same sort of problem happens with JFS if unicode.sys goes missing, ask Remy.
Edit2:, also the max size of the cache is 2048 KB, so your /cache:4000 likely just loads the default, 1024KB
Also remove the /Q when testing so you see any messages

« Last Edit: February 09, 2023, 12:20:24 am by Dave Yeo »

Remy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
  • Karma: +9/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #43 on: February 09, 2023, 01:17:42 am »
I only would test with an USB3 harddisk. Fastest are the 3,5" ones. But for FAT32 test every disk should be fast enough. Sticks are so different and sometimes transfer rate starts with high speed but drops afterwards -> unusable for comparison tests.

Hi Andy, read my comments
With SATA fat32 HD partition, it is very slow too (near 1MB/s ... in write)

It looks like it is partition size dependant ! may it be possible ?
(A small USB key is faster than the SATA FAT32 HD !)

roberto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Karma: +3/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« Reply #44 on: February 09, 2023, 04:15:34 pm »
Sorry Dave, this is in mistake. Keep in mind that I do not have a manual, and I do evidence and error, and sometimes I take bad conclusions that then correct.

Quote
With reference to Fat32 Cache, the information provided was incomplete, how strange no one is tested
This would be the right thing:
REM IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:2048 /h /q /ac:* /largefiles
IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:4000 /q /ac:* /largefiles
REM CALL=C:\OS2\CACHEF32.EXE /f /p:2 /m:50000 /b:250 /d:5000 /S
The correct is:
IFS=C:\OS2\HPFS.IFS /CACHE:2000 /CRECL:4 /AUTOCHECK:GL*
IFS=C:\OS2\FAT32.IFS /cache:2000 /h /q /ac:* /largefiles
rem CALL=C:\OS2\CACHEF32.EXE /f /p:2 /m:50000 /b:250 /d:5000 /S

swappath=L:\ 2000 409600

REM DISKCACHE=D,LW
DISKCACHE=4096000,LW

Provisted screen in Memory ON (I don't know if it will be necessary or not.)

Quote
Along with caching, it also does the unicode translation. Remove it and create a file with umlauts or such, put it back and you get crashes, same if you shared the stick, might even crash Windows, though they probably protect against it.
What you might want to do is turn off lazy writing, which some say really helps with USB sticks and the ramdisk. From \sys\book\fat32.inf, under CACHEF32,
Well, I have tried it in Win10, and no problem.
I have been able to copy the files without problem, to win10.
I have a ramdisk 512mb in L:\ with the swappath here.

I have tried without /q and it shows me nothing strange in the start, but it does not work at high speed, it only works 60 minutes, slow.

-Ivan
Thanks for your comment, but I have to use these micro SD, for camera photos, and other equipment.
saludos
« Last Edit: February 09, 2023, 04:27:52 pm by roberto »