|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Just remove all the files in %TEMP% and %TMP% directories. These could be set to
different drives than you are deleting files from (echo %TEMP%).
This is what the problem is. I've had this happen with other applications
besides ts.
Chris Evans wrote:
> no it is not just your computer .. I get the same error and cannot fix it
> and I have been on with a relatively good tech support guy who made sure my
> temp file was truly empty .. all to no avail
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Trevor.Neil@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bfulks@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:13 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
> >
> >
|