HardwareBanter - View Single Post

Keith

In article ,
says...
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 23:00:15 -0500, Keith wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:31:51 -0500, daytripper wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 23:25:50 +0000, GSV Three Minds in a Can
wrote:

It would allow an even deeper level of coma than 'Hibernation' I guess
.. you could turn the power off or pull the wall plug and still resume
where you left off.

You can do that with a five year old peecee and an even older hard drive.
Hibernate doesn't depend on any circuitry maintaining state, it's a boot-time
function that loads the current hiberfil.sys file if it is valid...

THe hybernate file isn't kept up-to-date. It takes time to hybernate
(maybe even 30sec with 2GB of RAM ;-). Kick the plug out and you *won't*
go back to where you were.

Because that very hiberfil.sys *is* being updated, and until it has completed
successfully, the hiberfil.sys *is not* up to date. But that isn't the point.

But you *cannot* just turn power off or pull the plug at any time
and expect to have the filesystem in tact.

The point is there is no requirement for any level of system power to maintain
state to allow a system to come back from hibernation.

.....if it's shut down after hibernation is complete.

Once a system has successfully created the hiberfil.sys and shut down, you can
kick the plug all you like, but when you finally get tired of that and plug it
back in and hit the power switch, the system should successfully return from
hibernation.

Sure, but that's hardly the point.

Thus flash (on-drive or elsewhere) really doesn't offer any additional benefit
wrt hibernation (or standby, for that matter).

....which was my point.

Further, it's a bit dubious to believe what should be a spiral write to disk
is going to go any faster to a chunk of flash memory located on the drive...

Well, M$ does seem to have a problem with that "spiral write", but
I don't think flash would help them out.

--
Keith