Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th May 2009 20:43 UTC
SuperFetch is a technology in Windows Vista and onwards that is often misunderstood. I decided to delve into this technology to see what it is all about, and to dispel some of the myths surrounding this feature.
Thread beginning with comment 363246
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: No really, it can work ...
by eldarion on Sat 16th May 2009 01:41
in reply to "No really, it can work ..."
Member since:2008-12-15
On Arch Linux OpenOffice 3.1 is available, so I recently upgrade to that. When I first upgraded, on my modest system, i got these results:
Time to load for first time in a session: ~ 8 seconds.
Time to load subsequently in a session: ~ 3 seconds.
So, as an experiment, I also install preload. Now my system has a relatively modest CPU, hard disk and graphics card, but it DOES have 2GB RAM, so there should be some memory spare.
After installing preload:
Time to load for first time in a session: ~ 3.5 seconds.
Time to load subsequently in a session: ~ 1.5 seconds.
So preload has done some good. It hasn't done as much good (just after booting) as a recent load of the whole application does when it comes to re-loading the same application a subsequent time ... but clearly it does some good.
There was no (perceptible) increase in boot time.
OpenOffice on Arch is now effectively as snappy as MS Office on Windows on the same hardware, due to using preload on Linux (which isn't the default).
So pre-loading (such as done by preload and SuperFetch) CAN actually work ... in some circumstances, if done right.
Time to load for first time in a session: ~ 8 seconds.
Time to load subsequently in a session: ~ 3 seconds.
So, as an experiment, I also install preload. Now my system has a relatively modest CPU, hard disk and graphics card, but it DOES have 2GB RAM, so there should be some memory spare.
After installing preload:
Time to load for first time in a session: ~ 3.5 seconds.
Time to load subsequently in a session: ~ 1.5 seconds.
So preload has done some good. It hasn't done as much good (just after booting) as a recent load of the whole application does when it comes to re-loading the same application a subsequent time ... but clearly it does some good.
There was no (perceptible) increase in boot time.
OpenOffice on Arch is now effectively as snappy as MS Office on Windows on the same hardware, due to using preload on Linux (which isn't the default).
So pre-loading (such as done by preload and SuperFetch) CAN actually work ... in some circumstances, if done right.
The funny thing is that i use Arch too and preload makes my system start much more slowly that without it and i haven't noticed any difference on speed loading apps. Maybe on OO.org, but nothing more. I didn't benchmark it, but that was the impression i got.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2007-02-17
On Arch Linux OpenOffice 3.1 is available, so I recently upgrade to that. When I first upgraded, on my modest system, i got these results:
Time to load for first time in a session: ~ 8 seconds.
Time to load subsequently in a session: ~ 3 seconds.
So, as an experiment, I also install preload. Now my system has a relatively modest CPU, hard disk and graphics card, but it DOES have 2GB RAM, so there should be some memory spare.
After installing preload:
Time to load for first time in a session: ~ 3.5 seconds.
Time to load subsequently in a session: ~ 1.5 seconds.
So preload has done some good. It hasn't done as much good (just after booting) as a recent load of the whole application does when it comes to re-loading the same application a subsequent time ... but clearly it does some good.
There was no (perceptible) increase in boot time.
OpenOffice on Arch is now effectively as snappy as MS Office on Windows on the same hardware, due to using preload on Linux (which isn't the default).
So pre-loading (such as done by preload and SuperFetch) CAN actually work ... in some circumstances, if done right.
Edited 2009-05-13 03:52 UTC