|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Yup, as previously posted here, its the TEMP subdirectory in the Windows
directory that needs to be emptied. Probably doesnt hurt to do the other
temp directory too, but in w98 its the other that's critical.
good luck
nhbob
----- Original Message -----
From: Trevor.Neil@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To: bfulks@xxxxxxxxxxxx ; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 7:13 AM
Subject: RE: SP5 Update - Not Stable
Why I tried to load it, but it could not extract because there was not
enough space in the /temp directory. There is lots of space on the computer.
I downloaded it again and the same thing happened. I guess it is a problem
with my computer.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Fulks [mailto:bfulks@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 31 May 2000 11:58
To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: SP5 Update - Not Stable
At 12:58 PM -0700 5/30/00, David Fenstemaker wrote:
>I have been running the SP 5 update since last week,
>and true to Omega, it is less stable than SP3 or SP4.
<snip>
>The biggest problem with SP 5 is optimization,
>or changing system parameters while off line.
Although it has only been running for a short time, I have seen more
stability and speed with the new release. It is clearly faster for
optimization runs than previous versions.
Below is a summary of the time in seconds required per test for an
optimization run I that have used as a benchmark on several machines.
(These results include tests by several people on the same
benchmark.) It shows the that TS2000i was about the same speed as
TS4.0 through SP4c but became a factor of about two faster with SP5.
The slowest was 8.7 seconds per test for a slower machine on TS4.0
down to 1.4 seconds per test on the fastest machine on SP5.
This is for a clean install of SP3, upgraded to SP4c, then upgraded to SP5.
I wondered how the users are finding the quality level and speed of SP5?
Latest summary of benchmarks attached below.
Bob
----------------------------
The time per test was as follows (in seconds). (The total time for an
optimization run would be these numbers multiplied be the number of
tests performed in the run.)
OS TS4.0 TS2000i TS2000i
SP4c SP5
HP Pavilion 8550 Celeron 500 Win98 8.7
Gateway GP6 PII 300 WinNT 6.4
Gateway E-5200 PIII 500 WinNT 5.3 4.7 2.3
RK-500 (AMD K6 500) Win2000 4.9* 5.5**
Athlon A-750 machine Win2000 2.3 1.4
* 20 GB IDE disk
** 9 GB SCSI disk
------
NBench performance numbers on the machines:
RK500 E-5200 8550C A-750
CPU Performance, MOPs/sec
Integer Speed: 481 363 362 599
Floating Speed: 82 74 73 162
Memory Move Performance (MBytes/sec)
region width random random random random
1KB 1 216 214 124 400
1KB 2 345 430 248 794
1KB 4 913 897 496 1588
1KB 8 1335 1100 737 2075
10KB 1 193 215 123 404
10KB 2 318 419 246 791
10KB 4 798 836 495 1580
10KB 8 1249 1060 728 2062
100KB 1 14 29 37 76
100KB 2 28 58 73 150
100KB 4 55 114 145 296
100KB 8 134 276 294 720
1000KB 1 6 16 10 23
1000KB 2 13 32 19 46
1000KB 4 25 64 37 91
1000KB 8 61 150 90 176
region width serial serial serial serial
1KB 1 319 255 171 495
1KB 2 393 503 341 965
1KB 4 1019 1010 697 1904
1KB 8 1313 1033 688 2007
10KB 1 293 247 170 499
10KB 2 374 510 337 978
10KB 4 955 1024 691 1910
10KB 8 1222 1026 682 2003
100KB 1 53 116 91 221
100KB 2 83 181 165 402
100KB 4 122 247 270 651
100KB 8 135 276 295 723
1000KB 1 24 53 35 51
1000KB 2 38 90 58 95
1000KB 4 55 135 83 168
1000KB 8 61 146 90 183
Disk (MBytes/sec)
thread: C 0 0 0 0
write: C 22 16 5 8
read: C 23 17 5 11
thread: C 0 0 0 0
write: C 22 18 5 10
read: C 23 16 6 26
thread: D 0 0 0
write: D 16 17 8
read: D 21 17 16
thread: D 0 0
write: D 15 16
read: D 21 16
thread: E 0 0
write: E 19 16
read: E 20 18
thread: E 0 0
write: E 21 18
read: E 21 16
|