|
|
#52
10-15-2004, 12:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pokertracker load time
[ QUOTE ]
i'm pretty convinced you're trolling at this point. you're yanking "facts" out of the air and i completely proved that the defrag tool is recommended to be run with a drive that has never been over 50% full. you claimed that couldn't happen. as you can see, the analysis shows that virtually the entire thing is fragged. [/ QUOTE ] you "proved" nothing. with an average file size of around 3MB, i'm guessing your drive is full of MP3s. defrag used to matter when the average file size was 50K with 256B blocks with 10 fragments per file... that just isn't he case anymore. you simply don't get it. you recommend nightly de-frag and don't think it will have a negative effect on the disk "because DVRs read and write continuously"... they don't. they seek once and read/write a large portion of data and then park again. they can read and write the data far faster than the stream of video/audio is coming in or needs to be going out at. if defrag was so important, then way doesn't my TiVo have a defrag button? large file sizes + large disks + smart filesystems = relative no benefit to defrag just accept these as facts. you are wrong. your example even proves you are wrong. this is a math problems. weight the cost of a miss if you expect the next block to be the one you are looking for... in an MP3, it doesn't matter because you are buffering the data anyways. in poker tracker it doesn't matter because the data is just being read into RAM. an average file will have *3* misses and 750 hits. the misses cost NOTHING... this is not a real time system. you are wrong. 
|
|
#53
10-15-2004, 12:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
[ QUOTE ]
Anyone in IT should know you can get the specs from the control panel. [/ QUOTE ] hmmm... and what is the first thing you would disable on a public terminal? [censored] idiots. and i wasn't a microsoft tech at the company... i maintained the unix/solaris servers and wrote intranet applications. needless to say, the "control panel" wasn't an everyday part of my job. have fun with your MCSE and 40k bullshit grinder job though... i'm sure you'll enjoy it.
|
|
#54
10-15-2004, 01:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
they're not occasional queries. pokertracker is fantastic, but it is FAR from efficient.
|
|
#55
10-15-2004, 01:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
[ QUOTE ]
i recently quit my 100k/year silicon valley job, in which i held a senior IT position [/ QUOTE ] 100k is beans in the valley. since when is being an admin and writing web apps a senior position? [ QUOTE ] i know computers, i know poker [/ QUOTE ] and i know both of them better than you. [ QUOTE ] you "proved" nothing [/ QUOTE ] you said every drive which has never been over 50% capacity wouldn't be in a state where the native defrag tool would recommend running. i proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that it would. you were 100% wrong. [ QUOTE ] with an average file size of around 3MB, i'm guessing your drive is full of MP3s [/ QUOTE ] 0 mp3s. almost all of the space is taken up by iso images and backups (ghost, bkf, tarballs). where are you coming up with these guesses? [ QUOTE ] you recommend nightly de-frag and don't think it will have a negative effect on the disk "because DVRs read and write continuously"... they don't. they seek once and read/write a large portion of data and then park again. they can read and write the data far faster than the stream of video/audio is coming in or needs to be going out at. [/ QUOTE ] dvrs are recording literally 100% of the time. that's what enables people to pause/rewind live television. it is constantly recording the channel which is presently tuned, even if they are watching something that is already recorded. [ QUOTE ] if defrag was so important, then way doesn't my TiVo have a defrag button? large file sizes + large disks + smart filesystems = relative no benefit to defrag [/ QUOTE ] it's not a desktop pc, and has nowhere near the performance demands or benefits that defragging would give it if it were on a highly fraggable file system like ntfs or fat32. it's not, it uses ext2. [ QUOTE ] in an MP3, it doesn't matter because you are buffering the data anyways. in poker tracker it doesn't matter because the data is just being read into RAM [/ QUOTE ] will you cease your obsession with mp3s? i guess you're an expert on pokertracker - after all, you put an average database size at 64MB when most serious players have at least one that is in excess of 1GB. 64MB would be an incredibly small database.
|
|
#56
10-15-2004, 02:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
replace "MP3" with "Large File in relation to block size" in all of my posts. that is the point. if your drive is full of ISOs, their NATURE will FORCE them to be fragmented, but that fragmentation comes AT NO COST.
YOU. ARE. WRONG. as for my job, you are retarded. yes, many make over 100K... i didn't. i made 100K. many people make less than 100K... i didn't. i made 100K. as for, "since when are admin jobs senior"... ARE YOU F.U.C.KING RETARDED? they are senior, when you are senior. you know... like a "senior systems admin" or "senior developer"... have you EVER worked in a corporate environment? your post proved nothing as well about the defrag reco... watch this "I am president of the USA". did that prove anything? no. give me a 40GB disk with 1GB used and a 38GB file, and the system will recommend a defrag. use it for a few hours... it will recommend a defrag. the defrag in those extreme situations will not actually speed ANYTHING up. your disk is admittedly full of 700MB files. your average fragmentation per file was *3*! and by 50% free, i wasn't referring to capacity, rather free blocks. if you look at the graph you posted, how much would you say is white space? under 50%? yes. thus you are 1) wrong 2) an idiot 3) a moron 4) possibly a douche 5) retarded 6) a tad slow you know nothing about computers and nothing about poker. NOTHING. prove me wrong.
|
|
#57
10-15-2004, 02:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
forgot about the DVRs...
they are only recording 1) while you are watching live tv. 2) while they are recording a show you told it to. during this recording time, they aren't writing constantly to disk, they are filling a RAM buffer, then writing that buffer to disk as they fill a second buffer, then writing that to disk. if the disk can write 60 seconds of TV to disk in less than 1 second, then the disk will only actually be used less than 1 second every minute. the buffer size determines this value and it is set up to minimize disk use for the exact reasons i pointed out. they don't ignore the defrag button because ext2 is used... they ignore it because of the nature of the files on the filesystem... large in relation to block size, AS WELL AS the fact that ext2 does good to keep the disk in fairly good order. note: you can use ext2 on a desktop system... why do they have to then do "nightly de-frags"? you can't say they dont' work like a desktop pc... THEY ARE A DESKTOP PC! they run on the same chipsets... use the same hardware... you simply don't know what you are talking about. admit you were wrong.
|
|
#58
10-15-2004, 02:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
[ QUOTE ]
i guess you're an expert on pokertracker - after all, you put an average database size at 64MB when most serious players have at least one that is in excess of 1GB. 64MB would be an incredibly small database. [/ QUOTE ] i wrote my own poker tracker before there was a poker tracker. i had my server pull EVERY hand history (not just ones from my table) from an online site and store them in my own database. i have 1.2 million hands stored for 15k players. my database (running mysql) was around 150 MB, and my client provided all the same stats near instantly. this was all running on a 533P3 with 128MB of ram. this was a dedicated machine just for this program and the webserver and database. if they implemented their system wrong, that is there fault. i wrote mine from scratch... they probably used visual C++ or visual basic and used a ton of libraries that added bloat. i am an expert on everything. especially showing you up.
|
|
#59
10-15-2004, 02:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
[ QUOTE ]
show me a drive that has alays been 50% empty where the defrag tool states that you should actually use it. [/ QUOTE ]  that is a drive. i have shown it to you. it has always been 50% empty. it suggests that i use it. [ QUOTE ] you won't be able to. [/ QUOTE ] i already did
|
|
#60
10-15-2004, 02:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokertracker load time
[ QUOTE ]
if your drive is full of ISOs, their NATURE will FORCE them to be fragmented, but that fragmentation comes AT NO COST. [/ QUOTE ] it's the nature of the filesystem, not the nature of the file, that causes it to be fragmented. furthermore, any file of non-trivial size will have the same problem. [ QUOTE ] you know nothing about computers and nothing about poker. NOTHING. prove me wrong. [/ QUOTE ] i already have. how old are you?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
