so there, these are my sizes and timings now (the smaller, the better).
1gb fixed vhd 200mb free space - filedisk - bootmgr booting 17secs - freespace basically staying the same
its 302mb lz4 version expanding the same full size and free space as above - ramdisk - preramloading 3secs + booting 14secs = the same 17secs - freespace basically staying the same
the only scenario here is the last I have communicated: no primo ramdisk (windows seems to manage its temps much more efficiently, especially in terms of space), primocache (which still features much higher mass storage read and write speeds than ordinary windows caching). the nvidia files musta gotten embedded in the wim, which allowed me to shrink the vhd to the present extent.
now alacran's questions:
1 - Is Rambooting from a LZ4 compressed fixed size VHD a real improvement compared with an expandable VHD or not?
definitely so, it is, at least here (4secs faster loading time at least).
2 - Is the time consumed to build a LZ4 compressed VHD a valid investment or not?
it is, at least here, and of course, the smaller the faster.
3 - From my tests I know 1.5 GB is good size for PCs with a minimum of 4 GB of Ram, but is there a way to find a size that fits better in accordance with the Ram available on each PC?
the smallest size possible is the best, which depends on free space size: as long as it stays the same it is not prone to bulge c:\ to red. as long as c:\ stays turquoise, it stays fast.
4 - Is Rambooting from a LZ4 compressed fixed size VHD better for?:
better for everything but u need to resort to the plain source vhd for installing software or modifying settings. when u see the free space shring, it is time to bake another wim off the vhd and apply the wim to send the exeeding stuff on the wim.
- Booting from HDD
I can't answer that
- Booting from SSD.
whatever I said above definitely applies to ssd's
5 - Is Rambooting from an expandable VHD better for?:
hell no! no matter what wimb says. the expandibility of the vhd is nothing user-friendly (it does not expand the size of c:\ during operation; it just makes free space doddery, which is a nuisance that often leads to further manual expanding of the vhd); so I would call it user-unfriendly.
- Booting from HDD.
cannot answer that
- Booting from SSD.
same as above
I really do not care so much about certain difference on other programs that will not load things to Ram since they are on the source.wim wich is outside of the VHD loaded on Ram, but Primocache and PrimoRamdisk have a high influence on loading to Ram times.
I already answered that
And also do not care about total booting to desk time, since it will depend of installed programs and Apps that will load only god knows what to Ram during final stages of boot, (disabling Superfetch may mitigate this).
I do not think so, because, even if it had been true, U have something installed because u need it (unless told that something already existing does the job better --> verify and decide; what I find operationally crucial is vhd size for both preramloading and booting. let me verify the prefetch and superfetch kinda thing, since I have primocache, and I will answer more accurately, but if I remember correctly it might reduce loading time by just 1 second or so.
IMHO only loading to Ram time is valid in order to compare since this excludes almost all software loading times during final stages of boot.
And here is where we will never agree: it is easy to reduce preramloading time, just reduce the size of the thing that wants preramloading, which is the vhd size.
prefetch and superfetch kinda thing --> just verified. it does not reduce loading times, which stays the same as above, but it definitely leaves the \windows\prefetch directory empty, which does not contribute to free space erosion.