|
Hi all,
I have an obscure problem happening in my main data store folder. The folder contains 1136 subdirectories with a total of 2,397,000 or so files spread out over 121GB on a 1TB Raid 5 array. What’s happening appears to be a cache problem. The symptoms are as follows:
A file (lets say ..Folder1\Inv1.tif , 65KB) is loaded then closed.
The Directory containing the file then has its name changed, ..Folder2\Inv1.tif
I can still access ..Folder1\Inv1.tif from any computer that has opened it from that path; however any new computer trying to open that path fails.
The full path is a network share. The location of the accessing computer doesn’t seem to make a difference, Localhost, lan computer or workgroup computer all have the same behavior. I not sure if it is true for Mapped drives and local drives.
My hunch is that the algorithm for sensing cache invalidations is having troubles iterating through such a large folder.
I need some ideas on what the problem might be and a way to test it.
Ronald Hahn, CNT - Computer Engineering Technologist
New Technologies Analyst
HahnTech Affiliated With Code Constructors
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Email: rhahn82@telus.net
|
|
|
|
|
havn't tested but this could be it. still looking for ideas
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/839272/en-us[^]
Ronald Hahn, CNT - Computer Engineering Technologist
New Technologies Analyst
HahnTech Affiliated With Code Constructors
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Email: rhahn82@telus.net
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, is there any function that could convert Intel celeron speed to Intel pentium speed? For example if I have 2Ghz speed of intel celeron, what is the real speed in Intel pentium?
|
|
|
|
|
This is really a question with no meaning. The differences between the Celeron and Pentium families are in two areas: clock speed of the Front Side Bus, and amount of on-processor cache.
The clock speed of the front-side bus governs how quickly data can be retrieved from the rest of the system, for example, from main memory. A faster FSB allows faster retrieval from RAM, but only up to the speed the RAM is actually capable of.
The CPU does not communicate with the RAM directly but instead to a component of the chipset called the North Bridge in systems where the PCI bus was used to connect components of the chipset, and which Intel now calls the Memory Controller Hub - the bus between chipset chips is now something called Inter-Hub Transport on Intel 8xx and 9xx series chipsets. To fetch data from or store data to memory a request is placed on the front-side bus targetted at the memory controller, which then performs the operation and returns the results in another bus transaction. This allows the CPU to make other requests while it's waiting for the memory to return the results - while the quoted bus speed of the RAM connection may approach or even exceed that of the FSB, there is always a delay (latency) between sending the command and getting the response, and the quoted speed only relates to a single burst of data from the RAM, which is usually only enough to fill a single cache line - if I recall correctly this is 64 bytes on current processors.
To avoid the delays of going to main memory, since even the front-side bus runs at only a fraction of the core clock speed, the processor has a lot of cache memory on it. This memory is of a very fast type which can run at a significant fraction of core clock speed or even at core clock speed. For an operation that fits completely in the processor's cache, a Celeron and Pentium of the same generation with the same core clock speed should perform equivalently. Having more cache will allow some operations to fit into the cache that wouldn't otherwise. This effect is most noticeable on applications that are written with careful tuning to take advantage of the cache.
You will normally notice that a Celeron system is perceptibly slower than an equivalent core-clock-speed Pentium, but it's not something that can be quantified in GHz. The only thing you can do is run a benchmark that's close to what you want to do with the machine and see what the relative performance is. You could try one of the synthetic application benchmarks like SiSoft Sandra[^].
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for your comment. I ask this question because I have one computer with Intel Celeron 2 Ghz and I notes that when I run the computer in a long time, the speed is become slower and slower. The RAM is 128Mb and I'm running windows xp pro. Do you think if I upgrade the RAM to 2Gb (which is supported by the mainboard), my computer will run faster?
Currently I want to purchase a laptop TOSHIBA which have 256Mb RAM and CPU Intel Celeron 1.6Ghz and running windows xp pro. I plan to upgrade its RAM to 1GB. Do you think this laptop would run fasther if I upgrade the RAM to 1Gb?
|
|
|
|
|
128 meg is barely enough for the OS, 256 isn't much better if your multitasking goes beyond keeping solitare and minesweeper open at the same time. In both cases, upgrading to a gig should show a major gain from not needing the pagefile any longer. The second will only help if you're using your system hard enough to go past the 1 gig level. Check the commit charge numbers on taskmanager.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, If i record a video for one minute, which file format that is require less disk space with good quality picture (*.wmv, *.mpg, *.rmvb, *.mov, *.mpeg, *.dat or ... other)?
And if I record a sound for one minute, which sound format that require less disk space (*.wav, *.mp3, *.wma or ... ohter)?
|
|
|
|
|
Some of the formats you list (e.g. WAV) are containers - they can contain many different types of encoded data, with an indicator to show what format the contents are in. You can have a .WAV containing MPEG I Layer-3 audio data, for example. Even for the other formats, the codec used to perform the compression normally has configurable options to allow you to select how much compression you want.
When most people think of WAV files, they're generally thinking of uncompressed PCM data, which is pretty much the worst choice in terms of space, but requires virtually no processing overhead.
That said, WMA and AAC are generally considered better quality for a given file size/bandwidth than MP3, while MPEG-4, WMV and H.264 are generally considered better quality than MPEG-1 or MPEG-2. HD DVD discs can be encoded with VC-1 (basically a slightly modified version of Microsoft's WMV9), H.264, MPEG-4 or MPEG-2. The greater compression you want, though, the longer it takes to compress, so it may not be able to compress in real time. This may mean it's better to record in a less compressed format to begin with then convert later to save disk space or reduce download times.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Dimmick wrote: That said, WMA and AAC are generally considered better quality for a given file size/bandwidth than MP3
Thank you very much for your comment. I also found that WMA could record a sound for a long time and consume less diskspace. I found that in my tablet pc, but the sound recording seem not so clear because some people are sitting far away location. I used it to record the sound in the meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
The file format has nearly no bearing on the size of the file. What affects the size the most are the codecs used to compress (or encode) the data and the bit rates selected for the encoding. A higher bitrate will (usually) result in a higher quality playback, but also increases the size of the file.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP - Visual Basic
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for your comment. If the bitrate is importance, why there are many difference sound format available today? Why they do not create only one file extentsion (Example WAV) and just increase or decrease its bitrate to change the quality of the sound and disk space usage?
|
|
|
|
|
I said the bitrate AND the codec being used to encode it.
The file format, and it's extension, doesn't have any bearing on the size of the file, or very little. Why isn't there just one extension?? Because everybody comes up with their own "container format" to differentiate their product from everyone elses.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP - Visual Basic
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for your explanation. Have a nice weekend 
|
|
|
|
|
how to Enable/ disable FTP access to a system in the network
Thanks in Advance
|
|
|
|
|
Not really a lot to go on there.
All I had to do was make sure that the FTP service was installed and running.
Make sure that you don't expose it to the outside world though. FTP sites that allow annon connections will be sniffed out and taken over quicker than you can say 'free FTP site'.
I did it once just to see what would happen and before I could Finnish one piece of pizza someone had started uploading ripped DVDs to the site and had taken it over.
|
|
|
|
|
Ray Cassick wrote: I did it once just to see what would happen and before I could Finnish one piece of pizza someone had started uploading ripped DVDs to the site and had taken it over.
And were the DVD's any good ? 
Steve S
Developer for hire
|
|
|
|
|
I have to admit that I did wait for them to finish and checked them out. Really bad rips and not in English so I deleted them.
They did manage to build a folder in the FTP directory that I could not delete though. They named it COM1 and the OS would not let me kill it.
|
|
|
|
|
Ya Previously i had the FTP
But now some setting are changed ie.. IP/ permissions/
what can it be
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all:
I'd like to avoid the reboot while installing the MSI package, I have some clues but they are not worked as expected.
MsiInstallProduct(szPath, _T("REBOOT=ReallySuppress"))
After executing the above line the system rebooted without any warning. How can I really suppress the reboot?
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed that when I install programs such as Skype or MSN it adds some registry entries to HKCR (HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT), and this was done even if I'm in regular user (not power user or administrator). How is this possible? I though only administrator or power user have access to add this key?
|
|
|
|
|
Since Windows 2000, the HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT key is a merged view of HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes and HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Classes. The user's settings override the machine settings. You can therefore make a setting in HKCU which the user can write to. It's disappointing that more installers don't do this. Windows Installer knows about the difference and will write to the user's classes keys as appropriate if doing a per-user rather than per-machine install.
The user's settings are still machine-specific - they are stored in the UsrClass.dat file in the user's Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Windows folder. Therefore, even for a roaming profile, they don't roam.
|
|
|
|
|
dude_4453169 wrote: I'm in regular user (not power user or administrator)
Hi, as far as I know, a simple user do not have a user right to install any application. What is the group membership that your user account belong to?
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all, sorry if this is the wrong forum but I've no idea where else to ask.
I've created an ActiveX control using a 3rd party's tools (QT). To distribute the control I create an .inf file and wrap the .dll(the control) and the .inf within a .cab file. In this way, the control is downloaded from the web much the same as the Flash control. This all works great, and distribution does not seem to be an issue. The problem is, when I look within the 'c:\windows\downloaded program files' directory, my control is listed there, but its status is always 'Unknown'. It's driving me crazy trying to figure it out. I've torn apart the registry and looked into everything I could think of, but nothing seems to help.
So my question: does anyone know how the 'Downloaded Program Files' folder determines if a control is 'installed'?
I'd love to ignore the problem, but I want to be able to update the application using '#version' in my OBJECT tag's CODEBASE property, and it doesn't seem to work if the 'status' is 'unknown'.
Anybody have an ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Don't you have to register the ActiveX control. I actually can't remember the exact syntax right now but I recall having to do it when using one. It's a simple command you can run at the command line.
Not sure if you have tried this yet.
Laurie Hull
|
|
|
|
|
This explains how to do it:
<a href="http://activex.moonvalley.com/register_activex_control.htm">
Laurie Hull
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
