Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] kernel in ram partition.
From: Daniel James (daniel_AT_mondodesigno.com)
Date: Tue Nov 06 2001 - 13:17:18 EET
> if you are doing
> extended or multi-channel (say,8) harddisk recording, you can
> easily use gigabytes of space in one session.
Sure, but multi-gigabyte RAM in a workstation is now feasible.
1GB SDRAM, PC133 168-pin DIMM is now $163.79 at crucial.com
> also, if the
> computer happens to crash, freeze
I don't think this approach would be feasible under Windows 98...
besides, a crash during normal hard disk recording is going to screw
up that session, isn't it?
> or the power fails
It goes without saying (I hope) that a UPS is required for a serious
workstation.
> ram isn't going to speed up your
> recording, anyway (you just need a hard drive(s) that can handle
> it).
I was thinking that a pure RAM system would have less tendency to
produce skips in recordings at higher loads, since there's less
bottleneck. Only theory at this point, though!
Obviously you shouldn't do conventional mullti-track hard disk
recording over NFS, but I would have thought that you could save your
finished track with it in non-realtime.
As for NFS not being able to saturate a 100Mbit network, what's
holding back the upper limit for transfer?
For that Transtec dual-processor box I mentioned, see:
http://www.transtec.co.uk/adb/E_T6.pdz_s.plp/sid=03BE7C3A5XX3C82q?Z/E/E/E/X-ZAD|PCA
Daniel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Nov 06 2001 - 13:12:32 EET