Defer Write

[vbcrayon]

Hello people!

Amazing software! I'm speechless! I met this software because of the constant problems I had with Intel RST (Blue Screen constantly).
Three questions:
1 - Intel RST when there is an interruption, the chipset synchronizes the data on reboot. FancyCache does this when Defer Write is enabled? The data is simply lost? If FancyCache do not, you're going to put this function (In the case of SSD, of course)?
2 - Why Windows Experience Index (Disk) does not increase?
3 - What are the main differences between the RST and FancyCache?

Sorry my bad English!

Thanks!

[Support]

1 - Intel RST when there is an interruption, the chipset synchronizes the data on reboot. FancyCache does this when Defer Write is enabled? The data is simply lost? If FancyCache do not, you're going to put this function (In the case of SSD, of course)?

In the case of BlueScreen, sudden power loss etc, the data will be lost when Defer-Write is enabled. This is the shortage of the Defer-Write.

2 - Why Windows Experience Index (Disk) does not increase?

Please see viewtopic.php?f=26&t=823&p=2696&hilit=WEI#p2696

Thanks.

[Mradr]

Also please see this post: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1215

Power Failer:

Power Fail:
I understand if defer write is enable, any write data could be corrupted on a power lose. From my own stand point, the data happens only because of L1 was to lose power, yes? If so, why not give the option to disable L1 for use of the L2 and repair/finish the writes on the next boot up from L2 (I am guessing L2 will be an SSD or another hard drive where the data won’t be flushed like ram would)? This would keep data safe even on a power failed. Well, safe-r... there could also be some issues/data lose if power does go out, but at least would allow for the data that was defer to be able to be rewriten again at some sage instead of lossing it all.

The post has a bit more detail into the same idea. ^^; Hope it helps.

What are the main differences between the RST and FancyCache?

From what I can tell is this: FC has the power to use ram to help defer writes into larger writes, trim support before it even hits the disk, and increase IO speed using a different method than what RST does. RST does that synchronizes the data on reboot (as you said). Other wise they perty much do the same thing ^^;

[vbcrayon]

Hello support!

In the case of BlueScreen, sudden power loss etc, the data will be lost when Defer-Write is enabled. This is the shortage of the Defer-Write.

This shortage could be solved in future versions? I read threads you do not see advantage of SSD in L2 cache working alone. This is the basis of the SRT (Smart Response Technology) from intel, which is revolutionizing the market for SSD. The L1 cache in memory is great .. But it could have an option to disable it. Or to write in a specific time interval in L2 persistent. I live in Brazil, a relatively poor country. I do not believe in the coming years, someone will use SSD as the main disk. Cache SSD is a good solution.

Please see viewtopic.php?f=26&t=823&p=2696&hilit=WEI#p2696

Thanks.

I understand. For me, WEI works well (Disk Edition). But their results are the same with FancyCache disabled (5,9). Crystal Mark appears clearly the difference...

And speaking of disk and volume editions, I am using both versions at the same time. I created a partition for temporary files, where the "Defer-Write" and its shortage does not bother. The version "Disk" for the entire HD (Ready-only). And the version "Volume" for this partition (write-only + Defer-Write). There would be no way to merge the two into one? Or that a cache can serve others volumes?

Also please see this post: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1215

Power Failer:

Power Fail:
I understand if defer write is enable, any write data could be corrupted on a power lose. From my own stand point, the data happens only because of L1 was to lose power, yes? If so, why not give the option to disable L1 for use of the L2 and repair/finish the writes on the next boot up from L2 (I am guessing L2 will be an SSD or another hard drive where the data won’t be flushed like ram would)? This would keep data safe even on a power failed. Well, safe-r... there could also be some issues/data lose if power does go out, but at least would allow for the data that was defer to be able to be rewriten again at some sage instead of lossing it all.

The post has a bit more detail into the same idea. ^^; Hope it helps.

Thanks. That's right. If this were implemented it would be perfect.

From what I can tell is this: FC has the power to use ram to help defer writes into larger writes, trim support before it even hits the disk, and increase IO speed using a different method than what RST does. RST does that synchronizes the data on reboot (as you said). Other wise they perty much do the same thing ^^;

I enabled FancyCache over a partition RST. Will I have problems?