hope to add new funktion

[55 66]

I hope Flashfxp add new funktion of "write disk when recived XXXMB" or "harddisk buffer"

thanks:surprised

[bigstar]

This value is a fixed size, I'm really not sure that allowing this to be adjusted is necessary.

For removable and network drives FlashFXP uses a 64 KB buffer and for 256KB buffer for hard drives.

I've done extensive testing on this and I've found that for FlashFXP a 256KB buffer performs better than say a 1MB buffer.

[55 66]

now, dsl or adsl are faster and faster.
my dsl is 5MB/s, when i download with flashfxp, i find there is too much times to write harddisk. so i think adjust disk buffer self is useful funktion

(i speak germany, so my english is..........)

[MxxCon]

i have 30mbit cable connection at home and 45mbit connection at work and i have no problems downloading with flashfxp at full speed.
at such connection speeds, it's not flashfxp that is limiting factor but rather drivers themselves. drives real physical write speed is not able to keep up.
and like bigstar stated above, increasing buffer size does not necessarily make flashfxp write faster.

[bigstar]

I should point out that this was completely redesigned for v3.6 and if you're using v3.4 or older you will experience slower performance compared to v3.6.

When I reply to posts I always have the mindset of the latest and greatest release and I do tend to forget that not everyone is using the v3.6 release candidate.

Here's a transfer I just did with v3.6 RC1 on my gigabit lan where the limiting factor is the hard drive.
Transferred: test.file 165.56 MB in 3.78 seconds (43.79 MB/s)

[55 66]

I mean protecting the harddisk.
This feature can reduce the times(number) of harddisk to read and write.
I found ftprush, it has this feature.
Now can consider to use it, if flashfxp do not add this feature. this is also a good way.

[bigstar]

Hmm I was under the impression that this was for performance.

I'm not entirely sure that reducing the interval of read or write operations would extend the life of a hard drive as much as one would think. This is something that I may have to look into.

Take defragmentation tools for example they read/write and move data around as fast as possible from many random places all over the hard drive. In my opinion defragging a hard drive would be more brutal than downloading or uploading a file that takes the same amount of time.

You also need to take into consideration that the windows OS also provides file buffering as part of the operating system, file read/write operations are cached by the OS. I believe there are some registry values you can change to increase the amount the OS uses.

Sometimes you'll notice or at least I have noticed that sometimes there wont be any hard drive activity at all for a period of time but as soon as the file completes and the file is closed the OS will flush the file cache and you'll see disk activity as the OS actually saves the file to disk.

[MxxCon]

hard drives can handle 100s of millions read/write operations in the same place. it's far more than useful life of your drive.
also writing in smaller or larger chunks of data WILL NOT PROTECT your drive.
think about it...if you write 32kb at a time or 50meg at a time, in the end same amount of disk surface will be affected so claim of reducing drive wear is totally wrong.

[Eternity]

I mean protecting the harddisk.
This feature can reduce the times(number) of harddisk to read and write.
I found ftprush, it has this feature.
Now can consider to use it, if flashfxp do not add this feature. this is also a good way.

This will have absolutely no bearing on your hard drive whatsoever. More features do not mean better software. Now I can't say whether FTP Rush is better or worse as I haven't tried it, but if you pick FTP Rush based on the fact that it allows you to adjust a setting which makes no difference whatsoever you might as well make a decision based on the color of the sky.