Then again, I might as well have kept silent than post a reply on impulse. Sorry!
Yep.
Probably rephrasing your AFAIK as "without having ANY experience on the specific matter, that is what I presume" would have been more accurate.
jaclaz
Posted 26 June 2009 - 08:00 AM
Then again, I might as well have kept silent than post a reply on impulse. Sorry!
Posted 26 June 2009 - 12:37 PM
Posted 26 June 2009 - 01:33 PM
Posted 26 June 2009 - 02:25 PM
Since i dont have >4GB ram I cant test >4GBI guess we need to wait for Lancelot or any other "64-bit-enabled" user, in order to actually know more about it.
However, here it is reported to be working on x64:
http://www.planetamd...showtopic=35289
No I tried doing it from step three and its a no go. You need the device driver installed. For some reason doing a right click and install on the .inf file didn't work for me. Windows XP Pro 64bit SP2.
I had to go into
control panel ----> Add Hardware.
then in the wizard
Next(wait for auto detect to finish) ----> select 'Yes, I have already connected the hardware' and next.
then
Go to the bottom of the list 'Add a new hardware device' and select next ----> select 'Install the hardware that I manually select.......(Advanced)' and next.
then
select the top item in the list 'Show all devices' and next(this take a few seconds to load)
then
Finally you are at the bloody manual driver install screen(What a Saga). Choose 'Have Disk' and load the driver. You should now see a 'Ram Driver' device in the Device Manager under a new category called 'RamDisk'. Now that this is installed if you start the program that comes with the drivers it should now start working. As per my last post though, it seems you have to either restart your PC or disable then re-enable the 'RamDisk Driver' device from the device manger to get new setting to take affect. Also if you want it to be there apon restart it looks like you need to use the command line tool rdutil.exe to save to registry your RamDisk image otherwise on reboot it won't start properly.
Posted 26 June 2009 - 04:15 PM
Posted 26 June 2009 - 04:24 PM
We have at least one report of >4GB usage:
http://www.boot-land...?...p;p=41508
Posted 26 June 2009 - 05:11 PM
Posted 26 June 2009 - 05:25 PM
I do not see a practical usage of a 4 GB RAM disk.
Please, can somebody tell me one?
Peter
Posted 26 June 2009 - 05:30 PM
4 GB RAM disk is not enough!I do not see a practical usage of a 4 GB RAM disk.
Please, can somebody tell me one?
Posted 26 June 2009 - 09:07 PM
I do not see a practical usage of a 4 GB RAM disk.
Please, can somebody tell me one?
Peter
Posted 26 June 2009 - 09:22 PM
We have at least one report of >4GB usage:
http://www.boot-land...?...p;p=41508
Thanks a lot to both of you, dog and jaclaz!You mean this one, right (the link you posted is not fully working):
http://www.boot-land...amp;#entry41504
jaclaz
Posted 10 September 2009 - 10:01 AM
Posted 10 September 2009 - 11:44 AM
I want to refer to the sourcecode of the ramdisk,who has it?can you give it to me?
Posted 25 October 2009 - 02:40 AM
Posted 26 October 2009 - 01:22 PM
Posted 09 December 2009 - 05:45 PM
Thanks to this rule, I have never had a virus on my pc in 20+ years (yes, I'm that old.) So, to get to the point:"There are two things I will not use without knowing where they came from: A toothbrush and a program."
Posted 09 December 2009 - 07:01 PM
A chinese guy, that goes with the nick of lyh728.Who writes "Gavotte's RRamdisk"
You don't know , that is actually the interesting part:and how in the %$#@!* do I know I can trust any of the 3 gazillion version referenced in this thread???
Life is "trying things to see if they work"
Well, that's allright , since I am not jaclaz, but the unrecognized grandson of Groucho Marx, Booto Marx , and rather obviously lyh728 is actually a retired, middle-aged saleswoman from Peoria, Texas, of hispanic origins, whose exact identity I cannot reveal for obvious privacy reasons.btw this is not my real id
Posted 31 December 2009 - 12:16 PM
Posted 01 January 2010 - 09:41 AM
Posted 01 January 2010 - 09:53 AM
Posted 01 January 2010 - 10:03 PM
Posted 15 January 2010 - 10:40 AM
Posted 13 February 2010 - 08:20 PM
Uninstalling JV16 didn't solve the problem for too long, BSOD appeared again. At this point I decided to try SuperSpeed RAM Disk Plus (with PAE enabled) but it didn't make any difference. Quick analysis with WinDbg.exe clearly pointed to "memory corruption":
http://img684.images...52010050115.png
http://img684.images...52010050151.png
Disabling PAE was the next obvious step and it finally seems to have resolved the issue with BSODs. I went back to Gavotte and I'm running it like a standard RAM disk, without PAE.
This would indicate that my ageing hardware won't work under PAE:
- chipset: AMD Athlon 64 3500+
- motherboard A8AE-LE = Amberine M-GL6E
- BIOS: v3.15
- RAM: 4 GB (4 x Kingston KVR 400 /1GR /DDR, PC 3200, 400 MHz/)
The confusing part about all this is that memory corruption didn't happen right away. I was running Gavotte in PAE mode with exactly the same applications long hours every day for about a month before the first BSOD popped up. After that first instance there was peace and quiet for another week or two and then BSODs started to happen more often.
The conclusion seems to be that if you have a PC which only supports DDR1 RAM (which will be max 4 GB) do not use PAE. PAE should only be used on newer computers which support DDR2 and can have 6 or 8 GB of RAM installed. Of course this conclusion can be completely wrong.
A side effect of my experiments is write-hd-to-ram-disk speed comparison between Gavotte and SuperSpeed RAM Disk Plus. On my system Gavotte is definitely faster (I don't use the image file but batch files to copy data from HD to Ram disk). On the other hand, if your hardware supports PAE then SuperSpeed might be a better choice, it's GUI is far superior, you can quickly turn on or off PAE mode (they call it "unmanaged memory") from GUI and there are some stats showing right away:
http://img5.imagesha...52010053337.png
http://img51.imagesh...52010053513.png
http://img51.imagesh...52010053523.png
Posted 19 June 2010 - 08:25 PM
1. ramdisk过大导致NTFS格式化映像文件无效(1.0.4096.2) : I have no idea of it.
2. 加强初始化清零(1.0.4096.3) : Enhanced zero the ram disk on init.
3. 通过卷标查看是否使用高内存(1.4096.5) : Using or not the High Memory ( > 4G ) by checking the volume name of ram disk.
4. 修正部分ASUS主板兼容问题(1.4096.5): fixing compitable problem with some ASUS mainboard.
Posted 19 July 2010 - 09:01 AM
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users