The test will run but it will not run for long until more memory is added. After more memory is added, it will eventually continue. I have done it, but I was not logged in as root create a swap file to provide more memory. Linux just pauses when memory is 100% used unlike in Windows which will freeze before it ever hits 100% of memory usage.

On my 80386DX-40 with 8 MB of RAM, I ran a program that requires 16 MB. It ran because swap memory is there to take up the slack. Yes it is slow, but it ran it.

Sure we can upgrade our computers with a terabyte of memory, but when bloated programs are used we still need swap memory to take up the slack.

The RPM of the hard drive rarely has no relationship of how fast a hard drive can work. There are two categories for hard drive that can be quick. One is accessing time (may include latency from the firmware, controller, filesystem, and data bus). The other is bandwidth or throughput. If you want the fastest drive, pick the drive with lowest accessing times. Read or write big files in hurry, buy hard drives that has the highest throughput. A 5400 RPM hard drive can actually be better than a 7200 RPM hard drive because it produces less errors, produces less heat, consumes less energy, and provides more space. RPM of the hard drive is there to provide a sustain rate. If a manufacture took actuator and heads from a SCSI hard drive and place it in a IDE hard drive that has a spindle rate of 5400 RPM, the drive will be a lot faster than any 7200 RPM hard drive. Though a solid-state hard drive could be used but the cost will turn a wallet into ash.

E-disk - http://www.bitmicro.com/
Gigabyte Technology I-RAM - http://tw.giga-byte.com/Products/Sto...ame=GC-RAMDISK

Linux has issues with the I-RAM but there is video on Google Video that shows how fast Windows can boot up and how long it takes to find files.

"Sure we can upgrade our computers with a terabyte of memory, but when bloated programs are used we still need swap memory to take up the slack."

You're simply not going to accept that the total memory available to you on your computer is more or less the amount of RAM plus the amount of swap space, are you? I give up.

"If a manufacture took actuator and heads from a SCSI hard drive and place it in a IDE hard drive that has a spindle rate of 5400 RPM, the drive will be a lot faster than any 7200 RPM hard drive."

There are a lot of things that "could" be done in this world. The fact is that they aren't. 5400RPM drives are slow as compared to other drives with a faster revolution. The slower speed means that the bits go by more slowly. If they could compact the bits more on the disk, an equivalent 7200 RPM drive would always be faster. When I speak of 5400RPM drives, I am speaking about laptop drives. They generate less heat because the heads move move slowly. This contributes to slower access. Unless you can point to a specific 5400RPM drive that is blazingly fast, or even as fast as an equivalent 7200 RPM drive, then I remain unconvinced.

Faster the RPM speed, further the bits are. Slower the RPM, closer the bits can be. A 5400 RPM hard drive can pack a lot more data than a 7200 RPM hard drive. The reason for this is how fast the head can detect the change in magnetic field.

The heads do not move around the disk. They only move in two directions (in and out). The actuator that moves the heads can be changed with a better and faster version.

You do not understand accessing time versus throughput of hard drives. If you understand them, you will understand that RPM only effects throughput but not accessing times.

"Faster the RPM speed, further the bits are. Slower the RPM, closer the bits can be. A 5400 RPM hard drive can pack a lot more data than a 7200 RPM hard drive. The reason for this is how fast the head can detect the change in magnetic field."

Then why do they bother making 7200 and 10,000 RPM drives? Could it be because they actually are faster? This week, perhaps they can't use the same bit density on a 7200RPM drive that they can on a 5400RPM drive. Next week would probably be a different story, though.

"You do not understand accessing time versus throughput of hard drives. If you understand them, you will understand that RPM only effects throughput but not accessing times."

Can you pick two specific hard drives to talk about instead of woulda, coulda, shoulda? The drives should be relatively the same size, but I'd accept an 80GB drive vs a 100GB drive. The cost to the consumer should be relatively the same, but I'd accept a 5400RPM drive that cost 10% more than an equivalent 7200RPM drive. In practice, just show me a 5400RPM drive that outperforms a relatively equivalent 7200RPM drive; where you're not picking an obsolete bottom of the barrel 7200RPM drive vs a state of the art shiny new 5400RPM drive. To be fair, both should have the same interface (PATA or ATA or SCSI), and more or less the same cache size, though cache is normally disabled in benchmark tests. Show me the real world case where the 5400RPM drive is faster and I'll cede the point.

Girls, can you please take that HDD discussion out via e-Mail? It doesn't
belong to the thread, and there seems to be lots of emotion involved at
this stage, which won't do the discussion any good either.



Thanks,
Tink

Sorry. You're right, of course.

I do not respond by email on these type of topics.