Cache fill

By Mike | November 18th, 2008 | 3:23 am

I have 1Gb of RAM, 3G of flash and 8Gb of HDD assigned to EBoostr and the flash and hdd are at 0% however I notice that the RAM fill is gradually increasing as I use my computer and then manually build cache.  I imagine that when the RAM gets to 100% it will start to fill the flash?  On previous versions I have looked at, it seems to fill all cache devices fairly quickly.

I was wondering if this different way of filling the cache is due to the new version’s use with Vista which already has Superfetch and Readyboost.  Should the new version function differently depending on whether it is installed on a Vista or XP machine?

Although the explanation for the new version says that no files stored in RAM are also stored in other cache sources, would it be a good idea to double up the caching so you could take advantage of a kind of ‘RAID 0’ effect when the flash is reading at full speed?  You could also read from an attached hard drive simultaneously for files that would otherwise only be stored in RAM or flash and hence increase throughput further.

Note – the application accelerator seems to chose the wrong name for quite a few applications and I have had to manually add shortcuts instead.  Work in this area would certainly improve the product.

2 Responses to “Cache fill”

  1. Ilya Elenik
    Nov 18, 2008

    There is no difference with pervious version in case of small amount of files. In this case all accessed files will be added to the cache during next cache update.

    As for raid0 there will be a little difference. Typical memory speed is 4000MB/s. If you will add hard disk or flash memory you will get not more than 4100MB/s
    In case of hard disk with usb flash, files will be duplicated in both storage.

    > …the application accelerator seems to chose the wrong name for quite a few applications..
    can you please give as any example? we will try to reproduce it here

  2. Ilya Elenik
    Nov 19, 2008

    Thanks for application list. I hope this will be fixed in 469 build