Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

RegBench - Registry Benchmarker Utility

(1/3) > >>

mouser:
Looks like DC friend Jeremy Collake (maker of PECompact) released a cool little utility recently that benchmarks registry speed.

As Martin on ghacks points out, this will finally make it much easier to answer the questions about the effects of registry defragging and cleaning.  I can't wait to see the benchmark scores on before and after registry defragging so we can see what the real speedup is.


http://www.bitsum.com/regbench.php




from http://www.ghacks.net/2008/10/10/registry-benchmark/

city_zen:
OK, looks like I'm first here

I'll show you mine if you show me yours  :P

Here are my results before and after using jkdefrag's Registry Optimization and the difference in % :

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE         
         
Average random access time per entry   0.012500 ms   0.012810 ms   2%
Average random read time per byte      0.000200 ms   0.000210 ms   5%
         
HKEY_CURRENT_USER         
         
Average random access time per entry   0.009380 ms   0.009370 ms   0%
Average random read time per byte      0.000040 ms   0.000020 ms   -50%
         
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT         
         
Average random access time per entry   0.027350 ms   0.027180 ms   -1%
Average random read time per byte      0.000470 ms   0.000470 ms   0%
         
HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG         
         
Average random access time per entry   0.006090 ms   0.006250 ms   3%
Average random read time per byte      0.000000 ms   0.000000 ms   0%
         
HKEY_USERS         
         
Average random access time per entry   0.010000 ms   0.010160 ms   2%
Average random read time per byte      0.000030 ms   0.000040 ms   33%
         
         
AVERAGE OF ALL HIVES         
         
Average random access time per entry   0.013064   0.013154   0.7%
Average random read time per byte      0.000185   0.000185   0%


It actually made it worse, if only by 0.7 %

But let me mention that I had run jkdefrag a couple of days ago, so that may explain the minuscule difference

I also tried to run Tuneup Utilities' Registry Defrag afterwards, but it told me that "my registry didn't need defragging"

In any case, it looks like you can at most improve your registry access speed by a millisecond ... hardly worth it


Thank you for the link, Mouser. It surely is an "enlightening" little utility.

ghacks:
Well it is not all about access speed. The Registry is loaded during system start and a smaller Registry is loading faster thus reducing system load time.

nontroppo:
Yes, but if again it loads only 1ms quicker at start, that is probably swallowed up by the variability elsewhere. Anyone times windows start times before/after?

Still very interesting stuff!

f0dder:
Afaik windows doesn't load the entire registry (nor even the entire hive files), but does on-demand loading. I could be wrong, though. But even with full hivefile loading, you would need some serious compacting before you'd be able to see much improvement - it'd take a pretty old harddrive to go below 40MB/s sustained read, probably even on laptops (mine does 65MB/s -> 30MB/s, averaging at ~50MB/s. But that is a 7200rpm drive (rpm should have more to do with seek time than transfer speed, though)).

I would expect that keeping the hive files defragmented is more important than keeping them compacted - having to seek back and forth kills read performance rather quickly.

Anyway, even if the hive files have on-demand access rather than full loading, at the point you're at your desktop and ready to run the benchmark, big parts are pretty much guaranteed to be already loaded and cached. I guess that to actually say anything about performance, you'd need to boot from a different windows install and load "cold" hivefiles instead. Just a thought :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page