🚀 go-pugleaf

Hi Leythos,

How is your Dual Xeon setup, what hardware and how is your swap and pagefile
setup? I would be interested to know, thanks

Henrik

PS: eight GB that would be nice :-)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa439cac74f9a8898a23c@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <403a5966$0$28870$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, miro01
> @hotmail.com says...
> > It is not the swap file that is the problem - IMHO the problem is
entirely
> > this
> >
> > 1/ Data files and system swap files get fragmented leaving Photoshop
with
> > non-contiguous cache areas.
>
> This happens on ALL OS's and is not a problem for any OS or application.
> It just means that the data takes a little longer to get to/from the
> drive and to/from memory.
>
> > 2/ NT4, Win2000, XP all have inherited an intolerance for 99.99% disk
usage.
> > It is a known bug in the kernel of the OS from the original DEC OS port.
As
> > you know ..... PS can take all the space and still keep asking for more
>
> I've run PS since the Windows 95 days and run it now on my Windows XP
> Professional workstations and laptops. It has migrated with W98, W98SE,
> Win NT 4, Win 2000, and now with XP Prof. I started with PS 4 and
> currently use PS 6.
>
> There is NO problem with the OS.
>
> > 3/ A second drive is ok, so long as it isnt an IDE slave. The presence
of a
> > slave kills the performance of the software
>
> This is not true, it is a Myth. A second drive is actually highly
> recommended - use of a second drive with the TEMP space, Swap File, and
> other temp type items (including the PS worker space) will dramatically
> increase your performance when memory is low and when reading/writing on
> a busy image or computer. It's a simple fact that if you can read from
> drive 0 and not have to move the R/W heads for some other system call,
> that the performance will increase.
>
> > 4/ Inadequate ram installation makes the PS cache larger leading to
problem
> > #2
>
> Inadequate RAM on any computer is a problem for ANY application.
>
> > 5/ Any inherent faults in the FAT table will be compounded by Photoshop.
If
> > you intend to use PS then perform a Windows check of the file tables. An
> > unstable Windows installation doesnt get more stable when running
photoshop.
>
> FAT has nothing to do with it - any problems with the FAT will be seen
> by all applications that read/write data. In more than 10 years I've
> never had a problem with PS that was drive related.
>
> > 6/ Photoshop is not compatible with accelerators or add-on memory
managers
> > sometimes seen loaded with 3D gaming setups. The best way to run
photoshop
> > is with Gigs of ram and on a twin or quad processor setup running a
generic
> > install of the OS. Any extra booster technology doesnt actually do
anything
> > profound.
>
> 100% agree with this. I run with a single P4 and 512MB of ram on a
> workstation that edits web based images with no problem or swapping at
> all. I have a Dual P4 Xeon with 8gb of RAM for doing photo's and other
> images.
>
> > In most cases the hard drive is the victim and Photoshop is the suspect,
but
> > there is no basis for this assumption. A lot more has to be stuffed
before
> > that will happen.
>
> You can't blame PS, if that was the case you could blame anything that
> makes use of swap space or temp space - it's simply not the drive or the
> OS or PS that's at fault. PS does not do direct writes to the drive.
>
> So far, PS has been stable on every machine I've used and for those of
> us that use it in the different departments. If you are having drive
> corruption problems you need to look elsewhere.
>
>
>
> -- 
> --
> spamfree999@rrohio.com
> (Remove 999 to reply to me)