Netsurf Cache

After an informative thread on how the disc cache is used by Netsurf I wrote: On 13 Apr 2016 in article <55705bbd12nets...@avisoft.f9.co.uk>, Martin Avison wrote: > I have now deleted the whole cache, and reset Netsurf to the default > values for disc of 1024MB and

Re: Netsurf Cache -- relocation tangent

In article <1fd5ae6f55@abbeypress.net>, Jim Nagel wrote: > Several months ago I got fed up with this, and also with time wasted > by !Locate searching through all of !Cache. So on all my machines I > made a new directory that comes alphabetically last: $._ I

Netsurf Cache

In article <20160413104528.ga24...@kyllikki.org>, Vincent Sanders wrote: > I will go over how this feature works once again. [Snip] Thanks Vincent for the long and detailed explanation of how Netsurf uses the cache. After over 45 years working with computers I

Re: Netsurf Cache

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:06:04PM +0100, David Pitt wrote: > > How about this from a Titanium :- > > (75142.82) content/llcache.c:3402 llcache_finalise: Backing store wrote > 2590212 bytes in 1394 ms (average 1858114 bytes/second) 1.8MB/sec to an SSD is nothing to write home about. I'd

Re: Netsurf Cache

Vincent Sanders, on 13 Apr, wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:49:39PM +0100, nets...@avisoft.f9.co.uk wrote: > > There was much discussion about a year ago about the cache performance > > on RISC OS, and there were some code changes, but I would like to add > > the results of some

Re: Netsurf Cache

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:49:39PM +0100, nets...@avisoft.f9.co.uk wrote: > There was much discussion about a year ago about the cache performance on > RISC OS, and there were some code changes, but I would like to add the > results of some investigations of the Netsurf v3.4 cache on my Iyonix, >

Re: Netsurf Cache -- relocation tangent

Richard Porter wrote on 12 Apr: > I exclude any cache directories from backups. Ditto Scrapdirs. When you do a search, however, !Locate so far lacks the ability to exclude specified directories. That's what decided me to move !Cache and !Scrap to the very end of the root directory. !Locate

Re: Netsurf Cache -- relocation tangent

On 12 Apr 2016 Richard Porter wrote: > On 12 Apr 2016 Jim Nagel wrote: >> Martin Avison wrote on 12 Apr: >>> ... problems with the cache taking large amounts of disc >>> space, and the resulting long backup times for !Boot ... >> Several months ago I got fed up with

Re: Netsurf Cache -- relocation tangent

In article <485cc96f55.r...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter wrote: > I exclude any cache directories from backups. Ditto ScrapDirs. Same here, there is no point. -- Stuart Winsor Tools With A Mission sending tools across the world http://www.twam.co.uk/

Re: Netsurf Cache -- relocation tangent

On 12 Apr 2016 Jim Nagel wrote: > Martin Avison wrote on 12 Apr: >> ... problems with the cache taking large amounts of disc >> space, and the resulting long backup times for !Boot ... > Several months ago I got fed up with this, and also with time wasted > by !Locate searching through all of

Re: Netsurf Cache -- relocation tangent

In article <1fd5ae6f55@abbeypress.net>, Jim Nagel wrote: > So on all my machines I made a new directory that comes alphabetically > last: $._ That may well not come last on all filing systems, so no-one make that assumption. Jim doesn't specify what FS(s) all

Re: Netsurf Cache -- relocation tangent

Martin Avison wrote on 12 Apr: > ... problems with the cache taking large amounts of disc > space, and the resulting long backup times for !Boot ... Several months ago I got fed up with this, and also with time wasted by !Locate searching through all of !Cache. So on all my machines I made a

Netsurf Cache

There was much discussion about a year ago about the cache performance on RISC OS, and there were some code changes, but I would like to add the results of some investigations of the Netsurf v3.4 cache on my Iyonix, running RISC OS 5.23 (11 Oct 2015). In the past I had problems with the cache