|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Search Epson Archive
From: "dickbo" <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 21:59:04 +0100 Photoshop will not allow it and neither I suspect will Adobe because there are many millions of users who do not or cannot install volume RAM. Bear with me, since I'm not familiar with Windows, but is the issue that there's no way to create a RAM drive in Windows, or Photoshop will detect that and flat out refuse to use it? If the former (there's no RAM filesystem driver) it makes sense; it would be very unpleasant to do with user-mode code, and Adobe's not in the filesystem business. If the latter -- i. e. it's possible to create a RAM-based filesystem -- and Photoshop will refuse to use it for its swapfile, this seems rather contrary of it. Mind you with a nifty hard drive it is hardly worth the bother anyway I don't think I'd agree with that at all. RAM has 10-100x more bandwidth (the very fastest disks today top out at about 50 MB/sec; RAM bandwidth varies with the memory architecture but these days it's typically between 1 and 3 GB/sec on Intel platforms) and about 100,000x better latency (~100 ns for RAM, ~10 ms for disk). Again, I'm not familiar with how well Photoshop optimizes its use of the swap file, but if it's not able to do I/O in close to megabyte chunks it's going to be latency-bound (which means really disastrous slowdowns) rather than bandwidth-bound (which is still bad, but not nearly as bad). -- Robert Krawitz <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/ Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail email@example.com Project lead for Gimp Print/stp -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.