Mike,
And then the thread was hijacked by the monitor topic. Sad but true, so I'll
try to get it back on to track for you.
I just went through a similar process for my photo-editing rig. Allow me to
elaborate a bit on background thoughs and my practical implementation.
I am using my machine to bulk scan film and slides and edit the files in
Photoshop, both manually and in batch jobs. It is scanning in 4000 dpi @
48bit, resulting in 135 MB file for each frame; about 5 GB per film.
Analising how Photoshop deploys the available resources, disk IO turnes out
to be a limiting factor (even in a 2 GB RAM PeeCee). It really loves to
create its own swap files. So, with my setup I am trying to prevent
simultanious read/write action to ONE disk.
I figured out the following set up (each disk having its own controller):
Disk 1: storing the initial scans (D:),
Disk 2: Photoshop swap space (H:),
Disk 3: final pictures and archive (G:).
Disk 2 also contains other partitions:
(C:) OS and applications
(E:) temp and OS swapfile
(F:) disk maintenance tools (DOS accessible, FAT file system)
Recently I gave it a severe beating:
I was scanning a slide film, while simultaniously processing a directory of
previous scans with a PS batchjob. At the same time I rebuilt ACDSee
thumbnails for my archive. It did so without flinching.
It really is much faster than before. I cannot recall exactly, but I think I
had the tasks of disks 1 and 3 combined in 1 disk (Or was it disks 1 and
2?).
In my opinion, the disk layout is the most important in achieving speed. The
quality of the components is helping, though I guess it is not the main
factor. To be complete, I'll be some more specific on the components in my
PC case
Disk 1 and 2 are WD Raptor 74 GB 10.000 rpm.
Disk 3 is a RAID 0 array of two 320 GB WD 7.200 rpm drives in an external
enclosure (it was hot enough already inside the PC case)
CPU AMD athlon XP mobile thingy. 32 bit, 512 KB L2 cache 2200 MHz, that
would make an AMD rating of 3400 or so.
Windows 2000 prof
All filesystems NTFS (apart from the one FAT thingy). Don't use FAT32, it
is for kids. Ill-bred kids.
Matrox MGA 550 AGP Graphics
And to throw the monitor guys a bone, it is all hooked up to a Silicon
Graphics CRT!
Have fun building!
Cheers,
Bart
On 8/16/06, Mike <watershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> I finally 'bit the bullet' (no gun thread hijack please) and ordered a
> new computer. Or at least the pieces to make one.
>
> 1) I ordered 2 WestDig 250gb SATA HD's and wondered what would be the
> best way to format/partition them? I also have my old 80gb IDE drive
> with archived photos etc. which is FAT32 with several partitions but no
> OS. I was thinking I would just hook up the 80bg drive and copy the
> whole contents to one of the 250gb drives which would then become the
> main archive drive. The old stripped down computer goes out in the shop
> on full time backup detail.
>
> 2) The other 250gb drive would get a reasonable partition for WinXP and
> another for ubuntu maybe. How should I break this up?
>
> 3) I have WinXP home edition now but am thinking to upgrade. Should I?
> Recommendations?
>
> 4) Finally, anyone have any experience with this monitor?
> <http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824001226>
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|