• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 232
  • Last Modified:

64 kb clusters on windows 95?

I have my swap file on a dedicated partition on my second drive and used partition magic to bump the cluster size up to 32 kb. I am tempted to enable 64 kb support and bump it up to 64 kb.  I was just wondering if anyone out there has already tried this and if so if they had any problems.

0
cullock
Asked:
cullock
  • 2
  • 2
1 Solution
 
j2Commented:
why do you want LARGER clusters?

"the smaller the better" Due to speed, lower overhead waste etc etc...

Anyway, i have tried 64KB on W95 and it works ok... but i prefer the 512byte clusters.
0
 
DingusCommented:
Why are you so interested in wasting so much space? The larger the cluster size the more file slop you get. You need to take the  cluster size down as low as you can otherwise you will fill up your hard drive in no time. If you save a 1k file with 32k clusters, it takes up 32k on the drive. If you save a 1k file with 64k clusters you just gave your self 63k of wasted space on your hard drive. That adds up quick.
0
 
cullockAuthor Commented:
Perhaps I should have explained my justififcation for doing so a bit more.  Since my swap file is on a small dedicated partition of 40 mb it is never fragmented since it is the only file on the whole partition (when you have a file that is 30 mb in size the difference in wasted space between a partition with 1 kb clusters and 64 kb clusters would be 30 mb+1kb versus 30 mb+64kb, a difference so miniscule that it is not worth considering). Furthermore, while smaller cluster does translate into less waste (in ordinary circumstances) you are incorrect in assuming that this trasnlates into increased speed. Waste and speed are inversely related: the higher the speed the more waste and vice-versa.  This is hwy microsoft chose 4 kb clusters for fat32 as they saw this as the best compromsie betwen speed and waste.

With a little tinkering I found that setting min and max to the same value on the swap file size rather than letting windows manage virtual memory halved the disk thrashing that goes along with VM continuously expanding and contracting for no real good reason.  This unfortunately does not prevent fragmnetation of the swap file so I used partition magic to create a 40 mb partition on my second drive on my secondary ide controller and redirected the swap file to this drive, freeing up my primary drive for program activity.  I then used pmagic to bump up the cluster size on the swap file partition since larger clusters provides a small performance increase in reads (doesn't have to read as many clusters).  I'm not to sure about how much difference changing the cluster size really makes, but I used a few becnhmarking programs and they showed a bit of a performance increase


0
 
j2Commented:
all i know is: most IDE drives CRAWLS with 64KB clusters, and FLIES with 8KB.. the benchmark programs usually gets fooled by the clustersize.
0
 
cullockAuthor Commented:
Okay,but I'd appreciate it if you could provide some sort of technical epxlanation as to why IDE drives like the smaller cluster size :)
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

Join & Write a Comment

Featured Post

Cloud Class® Course: Certified Penetration Testing

This CPTE Certified Penetration Testing Engineer course covers everything you need to know about becoming a Certified Penetration Testing Engineer. Career Path: Professional roles include Ethical Hackers, Security Consultants, System Administrators, and Chief Security Officers.

  • 2
  • 2
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now