XP's LargeSystemCache can cause data corruption?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I came across a few slightly differing explanations on the Net which
told me that setting the value of 'LargeSystemCache' in XP could lead
to data corruption.

Below are two extracts which I found on Google.

Is what the first extract says just a myth or is it actually true?


Dave

==================================

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer

LargeSystemCache=0 For 512MB RAM or more set to 1 for potential
performance improvement.

Note that data corruption may occur if the Large System Cache feature
is enabled in Windows XP. If you have more than 512MB of RAM, a large
NTFS disk or multiple large volumes (60-100 gigabyte hard drives
possibly in RAID arrays), and/or AGP graphics with large AGP resource
requirements (AGP aperture greater than default) then you will get
hard drive corruption. Don't enable Large System Cache in these
circumstances, i.e use LargeSystemCache=0.

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \System \CurrentControlSet \Control \Session
Manager \Memory Management]
LargeSystemCache=1

OR: Control Panel -> System-Applet -> Advanced-Tab -> Performance-
Settings-Button -> Advanced-Tab then select "System Cache" option

==================================

http://snakefoot.fateback.com/tweak/winnt/tweak.html says ...

"enabling the large system cache can be fatal when working with files
that takes more space than there is RAM. Because the file will be
allowed to occupy all the RAM and force Windows to use the swap file,
which makes the system extremely slow.

For example this can happen when copying an ISO file from one HDD to
another, or when someone copies a movie from your machine over the
network, or if running a disk benchmark program."

==================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David Peters <notmymail@mail.com> wrote:
> I came across a few slightly differing explanations on the Net which
> told me that setting the value of 'LargeSystemCache' in XP could lead
> to data corruption.

> Below are two extracts which I found on Google.

> Is what the first extract says just a myth or is it actually true?


> Dave

> ==================================

> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer

> LargeSystemCache=0 For 512MB RAM or more set to 1 for potential
> performance improvement.

> Note that data corruption may occur if the Large System Cache feature
> is enabled in Windows XP. If you have more than 512MB of RAM, a large
> NTFS disk or multiple large volumes (60-100 gigabyte hard drives
> possibly in RAID arrays), and/or AGP graphics with large AGP resource
> requirements (AGP aperture greater than default) then you will get
> hard drive corruption. Don't enable Large System Cache in these
> circumstances, i.e use LargeSystemCache=0.

> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \System \CurrentControlSet \Control \Session
> Manager \Memory Management]
> LargeSystemCache=1

> OR: Control Panel -> System-Applet -> Advanced-Tab -> Performance-
> Settings-Button -> Advanced-Tab then select "System Cache" option

> ==================================

> http://snakefoot.fateback.com/tweak/winnt/tweak.html says ...

> "enabling the large system cache can be fatal when working with files
> that takes more space than there is RAM. Because the file will be
> allowed to occupy all the RAM and force Windows to use the swap file,
> which makes the system extremely slow.

> For example this can happen when copying an ISO file from one HDD to
> another, or when someone copies a movie from your machine over the
> network, or if running a disk benchmark program."

> ==================================

--
For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" - Tacitus

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"David Peters" <notmymail@mail.com> wrote in message
news:31mkbbF3ddnoeU1@individual.net...
>I came across a few slightly differing explanations on the Net which
> told me that setting the value of 'LargeSystemCache' in XP could lead
> to data corruption.
>

I found the same thing: delayed write failures. When they started happening
on the MFT I started to worry...

There's some info on it at http://www.ati.com/support/infobase/4217.html and
also
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/22061/

This started happening for me at the same time that I 1. got a new 160G hard
drive 2. put XP on it and 3. installed the latest Omega ATI drivers. I still
don't know whether it's ATI specific; what sort of system do you have there
David?

At any rate, switching back to the small cache stopped further problems.
Either changing the registry or setting the control panel to optimise for
programs seems to work.



Rob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

> "David Peters" <notmymail@mail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> I came across a few slightly differing explanations on the Net
>> which told me that setting the value of 'LargeSystemCache'
>> in XP could lead to data corruption.
>>


On 08 Dec 2004, R Murphy wrote:
>
> I found the same thing: delayed write failures. When they
> started happening on the MFT I started to worry...
>
> There's some info on it at
> http://www.ati.com/support/infobase/4217.html and also
> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/22061/
>
> This started happening for me at the same time that I 1. got a
> new 160G hard drive 2. put XP on it and 3. installed the latest
> Omega ATI drivers. I still don't know whether it's ATI specific;
> what sort of system do you have there David?

I have an NVidia graphics card and on the mobo I have a VIA chipset.

> At any rate, switching back to the small cache stopped further
> problems. Either changing the registry or setting the control
> panel to optimise for programs seems to work.


BTW do the "Delayed Write Failed" errors mentioned on the webpages in
your links show up in the Event Viewer?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On 08 Dec 2004, Arno Wagner wrote nothing.

Arno, did you mean to post something?



> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage David Peters
> <notmymail@mail.com> wrote:
>> I came across a few slightly differing explanations on the Net
>> which told me that setting the value of 'LargeSystemCache' in
>> XP could lead to data corruption.
>
>> Below are two extracts which I found on Google.
>
>> Is what the first extract says just a myth or is it actually
>> true?
>
>
>> Dave
>
>> ==================================
>
>> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Exp
>> lorer
>
>> LargeSystemCache=0 For 512MB RAM or more set to 1 for potential
>> performance improvement.
>
>> Note that data corruption may occur if the Large System Cache
>> feature is enabled in Windows XP. If you have more than 512MB
>> of RAM, a large NTFS disk or multiple large volumes (60-100
>> gigabyte hard drives possibly in RAID arrays), and/or AGP
>> graphics with large AGP resource requirements (AGP aperture
>> greater than default) then you will get hard drive corruption.
>> Don't enable Large System Cache in these circumstances, i.e use
>> LargeSystemCache=0.
>
>> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \System \CurrentControlSet \Control
>> \Session Manager \Memory Management]
>> LargeSystemCache=1
>
>> OR: Control Panel -> System-Applet -> Advanced-Tab ->
>> Performance- Settings-Button -> Advanced-Tab then select
>> "System Cache" option
>
>> ==================================
>
>> http://snakefoot.fateback.com/tweak/winnt/tweak.html says ...
>
>> "enabling the large system cache can be fatal when working with
>> files that takes more space than there is RAM. Because the
>> file will be allowed to occupy all the RAM and force Windows to
>> use the swap file, which makes the system extremely slow.
>
>> For example this can happen when copying an ISO file from one
>> HDD to another, or when someone copies a movie from your
>> machine over the network, or if running a disk benchmark
>> program."
>
>> ==================================
>
> --
> For email address: lastname AT tik DOT ee DOT ethz DOT ch
> GnuPG: ID:1E25338F FP:0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50
> 1E25 338F
> "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws" -
> Tacitus