why won't write-behind stay disabled?

1) Is it possible that Cacheman is messing around with your settings - it
runs in the background, yes?

2) Get past the snakeoil about vcache -
http://aumha.org/win4/a/memmgmt.htm - note that the article says that VCACHE
settings should only be used in very limited circumstances one of which is
if you have more than 512 Meg of RAM installed, which it seems you do not.
You seem to say you have only 48 meg of RAM installed.

3) I will ask why you can't update your BIOS.

What other autoloading software do you have running on this system that may
be taking up your limited RAM? A 48 meg system *is* going to freeze and
misbehave with virtually all modern software - all the tweaking in the world
isn't going to change that.

Anyway, I've been referred to this thread to comment on your belief that
disabling write-behind somehow speeding up internet surfing. I am
struggling to understand how this can be so. I'll ask you define what you
mean when you say "internet speeds". Are we talking the time it takes for a
page to appear? Modem throughput? If the latter, there's no way write
caching can make a difference.

Logically, the only thing I can suggest is that a browsing slow-down, if not
related to your modem, phone line etc, is actually being caused by problems
with your IE cache, whether it be size, or corruption, or third party
software interference. As a test, I'd ask you to turn write caching back
on, and nuke your IE cache, make sure you is not using the 'automatically'
cache option (IE settings) then run a scandisk and defrag. I'm betting this
will improve your browsing speed, and that once you complete these steps the
tweak will no longer make a difference. If you've got an overlarge or
corrupt cache, and the system is suffering from an extended period of time
without defragging, it will slow things down.

Regarding this quote:

I was reading microsoft website about setting port speed
http://technet2.microsoft.com/Window...4f1a41033.mspx
when I read what this same article said about write-behind "You may
want to disable the write behind cache function, especially if you own
system critical applications, and ALWAYS shut down Windows AFTER
closing ALL running programs! This means all data will be immediately
written to disk, bypassing the cache."

I can't find the text you site at the URL you give.

--
__________________________________________
Sandi - Microsoft MVP since 1999
http://www.ie-vista.com
http://inetexplorer.mvps.org

Inetexplorer has changed - for instructions on how to
find old URLs, go he
http://msmvps.com/spywaresucks/archi.../14/46971.aspx



"Olive" wrote in message
...
Right now I'm playing with drive write-behind.
As of now, I still can not turn it off.

I'm trying to report results about the effects of disabling
write-behind on disk performance and on internet speed.
I've been reading this article. See the paragraph that starts with
"Another cause is poorly written 32-bit disk drivers"
http://www.cerberus-sys.com/~belleis...aq/overrun.htm
The article says a tempopary solution to slow internet speeds until
you can update your hard drive, bios and other drivers is to
temporarily disable drive-write behind. I installed a new drive in
2003, can't update my bios [don't ask], and have the latest win98
drivers available. So I thought I would try to temporarily disable
write-behind to test the effects. But I can not report results to
this NG until I can disable write-behind.

Sir, my current vcache settings are just the latest temporary settings
from months of playing with Cacheman and reading articles about memory
management. My current vcache settings use Cacheman to set min and
max vcache to 3072 and set chucksize to 512. Then I let windows
manage files and buffers by remming out lines files= and buffers=
from my autoexec.bat These current settings give me some stability
and (most importantly) free up for other uses about 13 meg of ram of
my miniscule 48 meg ram. Otherwise, sir, my machine starts swapping
early and often like a sinful couple in an open marriage.

Soooooooo, right now it's about disabling wite-behind.
I have faith in this NG. I know posters are searching for options.
This newsgroup has never failed me.

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:19:25 -0000, "Noel Paton"
"Jeff Richards" wrote

It must be turned off if you want to do any serious disk system
performance testing.

That is total BS! - the whole point of system benchmarking is to test the
system "as it will be used" - not in some airy-fairy-land of the dealer's
choice!

NOW you've kicked over the antheap! :-)

Will a faster optical drive speed up use in Windows?

Most likely, yes.

If I test two drives in otherwise-same PCs and one is faster than the
other, can I conclude that one drive is faster than the other?

No, because Windows is a multi-tasking OS that hardly ever shuts up -
these days there's always some background crap doing something.
Perhaps the slower system decided to do some indexing, Internet
groping for updates, .PF or thumbnail maintenance, creation of a
System Restore point, or the av hooked into the CD access - who knows?

So benchmarking tries to do two things; either mirror real-world
results as you describe, or exclude all other factors and concentrate
on the particulars of drive performance. You need both infos; the
trick is how to correlate them.

For example, most real-world tests would try to exclude any other
tasks running. But in such cases, any processor-sparing benefits may
be missed, because all PCs wait (idle loop) at the same speed. This
crops up when testing one HD's PIO vs. UDMA modes; the HD may not
saturate slower modes and thus give similar results when no other
processing is going on, yet be subjectively faster when doing
"real-world" stuff because UDMA frees up CPU cycles.

Most low-level benchmarks should take care of details like suppressing
delayed writes or whatever, and in fact your results will be more
"portable" if you make no further changes there.

OTOH, I'm pessimistic that disabling delayed writes will do much to
lessen the impact of bad exits from Windows, because Windows itself is
going to delay completing file operations etc. and thus create the
same risk. DOS benefits from Scandisk /X because DOS apps finish
thier writes when they exit; with Windows, everything is "lazy" to
provide the speed that we have come to depend on.



---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Don't pay malware vendors - boycott Sony
---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, (Olive) wrote:

Vcache settings:
maxfilecache=3072
chunksize=512
minfilecache=3072

Reasons are that I'm ways to inprove disk performance because I'm
tired of getting file system problems because my system too often
hangs up before data gets written to my drive (lost clusters and
orphaned pieces of files, etc.) I've tried everything else

That's what I suspected - and there's no way out; you simply MUST find
a way to stop your PC from bad-exiting. It should be possible,
because no version of Win9x "normally" falls on its ass for no reason!

The reasons may be:
- bad mains power or wiring, including PC's case power switch
- overclocking, bad caps, bad fans, other hware issues
- bad RAM
- failing HD (e.g. "just one bad claster", etc.)
- corrupted code base or file system
- no free space on C: and/or low maximum swap file
- malware
- bad drivers
- buggy software
- user failure, i.e. some dweeb who just switches off

Please if you wish to comment on my reasoning OK but help me disable
write-behind.

It's a bit futile, really, Your Windows installation's nads are the
registry files, and those always get written to disk on shutdown.
Sooner or later you will get porridged because a bad exit truncates
the registry, or because variance develops between file set writes
that are completed and registry settings that are not retained.



---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Don't pay malware vendors - boycott Sony
---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:08:25 -0000, "Noel Paton"

I'm also wondering whether write-behand cache control is still
manageable, even if Windows still provides the API.

Modern hard drives have 2M - 8M cache RAM on the HD itself, and is
"lazy"about flushing to the platters, so you'd still have data loss
risks due to the same overall mechanism even if the OS wrote all
changes back through the cache.

Further, many file writes are not really made as you'd expect;
instead, data in RAM that is pending to be written to disk may simply
be flagged as such. When things need to be in RAM, the first thing
that happens is that things that haven't changed in RAM (from the
original HD contents) are "paged out" and that RAM is used to hold the
new stuff. Only when all those opportunities are done, will the
system flush material that has to be written to disk, as that involves
an additional disk access and is thus "expensive".

So there may be substantially long critical windows even if you did
manage to stop VCache from delaying write-back. It may be in
deference to these realities that MS no longer offers the apparent
safety that disabling delayed cache writes might otherwise imply.



---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Don't pay malware vendors - boycott Sony
---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:19:25 -0000, "Noel Paton"
"Jeff Richards" wrote

NOW you've kicked over the antheap! :-)

YAY!!! Here comes Chris! sitting back with fresh popcorn

--
__________________________________________
Sandi - Microsoft MVP since 1999
http://www.ie-vista.com
http://inetexplorer.mvps.org

Inetexplorer has changed - for instructions on how to
find old URLs, go he
http://msmvps.com/spywaresucks/archi.../14/46971.aspx

Cacheman certainly does run in the background unless specifically set not to
do so - I made a point of checking into that point. It cannot show how much
memory is free "at any given time" unless it is loaded and actively
monitoring.

With only 48 megs of RAM, "some" autorunning programs will certainly be a
problem. With such a low level of RAM on Win98 you can't afford any
autoloading programs. Do you have an antivirus program? There goes what
little free memory you had available to you, right there? You don't have
antivirus? Sorry, but then I have to say that you are more likely than not
to have malware on your system of some type or other.

I'll admit that I am, even today, maintaining some Win95 systems with 16 and
32 meg of RAM, and some Win98 systems with 64 Meg, but the only reason such
low stats are workable is because these systems are hooking into Terminal
Servers, with the server hosting the applications, meaning that the boxes
only need enough memory to render some bitmaps.

You say that you freed up half a gig of drive space yesterday; you do
realise that that there is a maximum size hard drive that
Win98 can use, yes?

Y'know, I've been doing this for a very long time, and have been taught by
the best of the best. That being said, I have no idea who mdgx.com is...
just because something is on the internet, and it sounds authoritive,
doesn't make it true. His disclaimers restrict his advice to Intel based,
desktop, non networked PCs only ... he even specifically excludes laptops.
He states he has no computer qualifications, and that he pursues computing
purely as a hobby. In short, don't trust him.

You say that "too many articles read get jumbled in the mind". I agree
wholeheartedly and think you have hit the nail on the head right there.
Personally, I think you need to get back to basics. Stop tweaking on the
word of unknowns discussing operating systems that don't even apply to you,
and touting advice that is doubtful at best, and dangerous at worst. I
believe your system has been tweaked to death and tweaked in such a way to
do more harm that good. Untangling things will be well nigh impossible.
Given the choice I would wipe out your install and start afresh.

How large is your IE cache? Did you nuke it (not just empty, nuke... ie: use
deltree to delete the pre-existent folders, and create a new one as
recommended (remembering that simply emptying the cache isn't sufficient.
You have to reduce its size. Simple defragging also isn't sufficient.

Let's be clear; turning off write-back caching will *not* speed up your
internet connection. No how, no way.

--
__________________________________________
Sandi - Microsoft MVP since 1999
http://www.ie-vista.com
http://inetexplorer.mvps.org

Inetexplorer has changed - for instructions on how to
find old URLs, go he
http://msmvps.com/spywaresucks/archi.../14/46971.aspx


"Olive" wrote in message
...
Thanks for response.

"I can't find the text you site at the URL you give."
Sorry. Too many articles read get jumbled in the mind.
The quote "You may want to disable the write behind cache function,
especially if you own
system critical applications..."
comes from this article near top of page
http://www.mdgx.com/newtip12.htm
The microsoft articles were used to learn about com port speed versus
modem speed.

"If you've got an overlarge or corrupt cache, and the system is
suffering from an extended period of time without defragging, it will
slow things down."
I defragged yesterday after freeing up 1/2 gig by wiping out caches,
reducing size of recycle bin, etc. Afterwards saw no change in
internet speed.

"What other autoloading software do you have running"
Some but not a problem. Even with only systray and explorer running my
system hangs. Over time I discovered know how much autoload is too
much.

"Snake oil ... "
Yes I've read that article recently and many times too.
I had to combine that one with this article
http://thpc.info/ram/vcache98.html
to finally make clear to me what vcache is and does.

"It runs in the background, yes?"
No, Cacheman does not run in background. It's only a user-friendly
method of changing vcache settings. It also shows how much free ram
is left at any given time which helps with finding good settings.

No no no no no..... using ctrl, alt, del is not the proper way to shut down
programs. You are adding to your problems by shutting down programs
improperly in this way. You do realise, I hope, that using ctrl, alt, del
is a prime example of the "bad exiting" that you hope to avoid.

VXD files are hardware drivers - I'm betting video, although without
specifics I cannot be absolutely certain. Give me specifics and I'll tell
you exactly what is causing your problem,.

If your PC only lets you work for 3 hours without rebooting then it is way
past its use by date. No ifs, no buts, no maybes. There is nothing you can
do to tweak it into pretending it is more than it is.

--
__________________________________________
Sandi - Microsoft MVP since 1999
http://www.ie-vista.com
http://inetexplorer.mvps.org

Inetexplorer has changed - for instructions on how to
find old URLs, go he
http://msmvps.com/spywaresucks/archi.../14/46971.aspx


"Olive" wrote in message
...
I'm with you on the bad exiting.
I resorted long ago to manually closing every program, CTRL ALT DEL to
close remaining open programs before exiting (sometimes I run Scandisk
briefly before exiting Win98.)
I also do a warm boot every two hours exactly during long work
sessions. My current settings are "good" where "good" means they let
me work at least 3 hours without doing a warm boot.

Had blue screen shut down problems forever especially with VXD files.
Solved that issue about a year ago. Now I'm just looking to work 3 to
4 hours straight with the ability to exit normally.

Thanks for response.

"I can't find the text you site at the URL you give."
Sorry. Too many articles read get jumbled in the mind.
The quote "You may want to disable the write behind cache function,
especially if you own
system critical applications..."
comes from this article near top of page
http://www.mdgx.com/newtip12.htm
The microsoft articles were used to learn about com port speed versus
modem speed.

"If you've got an overlarge or corrupt cache, and the system is
suffering from an extended period of time without defragging, it will
slow things down."
I defragged yesterday after freeing up 1/2 gig by wiping out caches,
reducing size of recycle bin, etc. Afterwards saw no change in
internet speed.

"What other autoloading software do you have running"
Some but not a problem. Even with only systray and explorer running my
system hangs. Over time I discovered know how much autoload is too
much.

"Snake oil ... "
Yes I've read that article recently and many times too.
I had to combine that one with this article
http://thpc.info/ram/vcache98.html
to finally make clear to me what vcache is and does.

"It runs in the background, yes?"
No, Cacheman does not run in background. It's only a user-friendly
method of changing vcache settings. It also shows how much free ram
is left at any given time which helps with finding good settings.

I'm with you on the bad exiting.
I resorted long ago to manually closing every program, CTRL ALT DEL to
close remaining open programs before exiting (sometimes I run Scandisk
briefly before exiting Win98.)
I also do a warm boot every two hours exactly during long work
sessions. My current settings are "good" where "good" means they let
me work at least 3 hours without doing a warm boot.

Had blue screen shut down problems forever especially with VXD files.
Solved that issue about a year ago. Now I'm just looking to work 3 to
4 hours straight with the ability to exit normally.

"Anyway, I've been referred to this thread to comment on your belief
that disabling write-behind somehow speeding up internet surfing. I
am struggling to understand how this can be so. I'll ask you define
what you mean when you say "internet speeds". Are we talking the time
it takes for a page to appear? Modem throughput? If the latter,
there's no way write caching can make a difference."

Sandi,
In a nutshell the link between drive write-behind and internet surfing
is this quote "Anything that prevents your CPU from responding quickly
enough to interrupts from your UART can cause overruns."
http://www.cerberus-sys.com/~belleis...aq/overrun.htm

My understanding is that (Com port) overrrun errors is a data "layer"
problem which slows data flow between "layers" and eventually slows
data transfer between your modem and internet servers. Above the data
"layer" is the PPP/SLIP "layer". And above that is the MTU "layer."
The top two layers depend on the bottom data layer to have as few if
any com port overrun errors.
http://www.cerberus-sys.com/~belleis...aq/overrun.htm

Sandi, as for my definition of of internet speed, all things being
equal, a 56K modem should at best give you an average speed of 7.0
Kbytes per sec (K/sec). My average seldom went beyond 2.3K.sec.
Before all my tweaks I regularly saw 1.6 to 2.3K/sec for an internet
speed. After tweaks I saw 2.3 to 4.6K/sec. That's double! And I
haven't even disabled drive write-behind yet. I hope disabling
write-behind will further increase my average internet speed.

But here is full quote that links write-behind to internet surfing.
I'm sure you can decipher because you're trained.
Me? It's mostly over my head.

http://www.cerberus-sys.com/~belleis...aq/overrun.htm
"Another cause is poorly written 32-bit disk drivers that aren't
WD1003-compatible (needed for Windows' caching
software to work properly), and which lock-out lower priority
interrupts (like com port interrupts) for an inordinately long time
while they dump-to-disk a large write-behind cache. While awaiting
longer term fixes by upgrading disk/drivers/BIOS, you can
get temporary relief by turning-off write-behind caching.

NOTE: Windows uses a Terminate-and-Stay-Resident (TSR) program
for disk-caching called smartdrv which is loaded by your
autoexec.bat file. Add the switch /X to turn-off write-behind
caching. Windows for Workgroups uses a VxD called VCACHE,
ignoring smartdrv except for floppy disk drives. Write-behind
caching for VCACHE is turned-off with a line in the [386enh]
section of system.ini that says ForceLazyOff=C (or =CD if you
have two hard drives) with no spaces and no : after drive
letters.

A fully compatible disk driver (like Western Digital's WDCTRL.DRV for
its Caviar drives, or Ontrack Software's Drive
Rocket) will enable Windows for Workgroups to use both 32-bit file
access (with a VxD called VFAT) and 32-bit disk
access which bypasses the DOS disk interrupt services through a
Digital Protected Mode Interface. This provides much faster
disk reads and writes to allow more time for handling com port
interrupts. "