🚀 go-pugleaf

:-) I was just kiddin :-)

Henrik

<mathew@spamtrap-spiesareus.yi.org> wrote in message
news:slrnc3m56f.5ii.mathew@alpha.spiesareus.yi.org...
> On 2004-02-24, Henrik <tived@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> > Miro,
> >
> > what would be the ideal PS setup (skip quad and eight processors :-)
atm)
>
> That might well be a waste of time anyway. Is Photoshop multithreaded?
>
> > I am unfortunately stuck in IDE land, with a few four-channel cache
> > controllers AHA-2400A
> > and I am frustrated by not finding a good way to set this up or rather
tired
> > of trying :-)
> >
> > what would you recommend?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > Henrik
> >
> >
> > " Miro" <miro01@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:403a93fb$0$18303$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >>
> >> "Unknown" <thisandthat@hereandthere.oz> wrote in message
> >> news:IQt_b.322$zm1.10343@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> >> >
> >> > " Miro" <miro01@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:403a5966$0$28870$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >> > >
> >> > > 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.
> >> > >
> >> > > 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
> >> > >
> >> > > 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
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Have you checked out if a RAID makes a difference there? What about
SATA
> >> and
> >> > PATA?
> >>
> >>
> >> **** As I dont use software raid then I dont see the difference. All
> > volumes
> >> are transparent in hardware raid.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > > 4/ Inadequate ram installation makes the PS cache larger leading to
> >> > problem
> >> > > #2
> >> > >
> >> > > 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.
> >> >
> >> > Checked out NTFS to see if any differences there, too?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ***** NTFS has a FAT table too. FAT = file allocation table. If you
want
> > to
> >> see XP repair it just hard reset randomly 3 or 4 times. I dont know why
> >> people think that FAT is non existant. Apple has one too.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > >
> >> > > 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.
> >> >
> >> > Well that bit I actually CAN comment on with some experience. Used PS
> > with
> >> > accelerators under WIN98 and XP Home and never seen that to be a
> > problem.
> >> I
> >> > can only assume that PS for Windows either disables the accelerator
when
> >> > loaded and enables when exited or doesnt have a problem with most
> >> > accelerators using Geforce. Havent used it with ATI yet though.
> >>
> >>
> >> **** How does a 3D card accelerate a bitmap ? It doesnt. The clock and
cpu
> >> on the video card is where the redraw muscle is. The GLINT drivers are
> > just
> >> banana skins at best.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > 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.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > There is one thing you can do to get over this problem. Real time
mirror
> >> > imaging. Have you any experience with PS and that running?
> >>
> >>
> >> **** Mirror imaging under PS ? That is a fresh idea. I cant say I ever
> >> thought of doing it to see what happens. Seem to recall something about
> >> ignoble science and the patron Saint of lost causes.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> -- 
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GIT d- s: a--- C+++ UL++++ UB+++ P+ L++ W+ N++
> w--- PGP++ t+ 5++ X++ tv b DI+ D++
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>