I've got to admit a "thought" or set of them, about disabling the 1st one you mention, because imo, it may have a "trade-off", just like the 2nd one has (I mention it to Cj_Staal here in this thread ->
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=14326&page=2 ).
4th post down on that url/page in fact... decent read about "how" the first one you mention, in the "AlwaysUnloadDLL" hack being implemented REALLY works & what penalties you pay for using it...
gR3iF said:
jup but the biggest boost you get out of some things like disable last acces timestamp or disable that dlls are saved in the ram and so on^^
ABOUT THE FIRST HACK YOU MENTION:
E.G.-> Using something like the 2nd hack you mention by implementing the "AlwaysUnloadDLL" registry hack (to unload DLL's from memory &/or diskcache) once all reference counters to them are "zeroed-out" by the process scheduler portion of the kernel has a trade off as well, are we "losing" by using it too, to save memory (imo, on this one? Definitely yes, we lose using it, in the "long haul"):
I.E.-> By unloading DLL's from RAM, yes, you save memory... but, you force a reload from disk as well once they are called upon again!
(AND, inevitably, DLL's will be once again by calling programs, this IS certain/inevitable)
Thus, slowing yourself down in the "long run"... a definite trade-off!
ABOUT THE SECOND HACK YOU MENTION:
Yes, I use the 1st one myself too, but wonder about it, & it possibly adversely affecting Windows boottime optimization/prefetch abilities!
(Mainly, you DO gain in the short-term using it, because it is one less thing being "written to disk" when files are accessed! Thus, it definitely speeds you up (albeit, if you think about what I am about to say, it may "hurt" some things)).
Prefetching &/or boottime optimization (placements of files most often accessed to the front/outermost/fastest portions of your diskdrive platters)...
Is it affected by the lack of this "timestamping" occuring?
Something has to be writing the entries for boottime optimization to work on, & imo? This may be it... or, part of it & necessary for it to work/function fully-properly.
I've always wondered about it! Are we making a "trade off" here using this one??
Yes, we do gain (in the short-term) by turning off this set of entries being written to disk for timestamping file accesses, but are we also losing?
(Simply by not keeping this set of accesses up to date, potentially 'adversely affecting' prefetch &/or boottime optimizations)...
* IIRC, it was mentioned here earlier that turning off the "Task Scheduler" service can affect boottime optimization &/or prefetch... could this one be also, because of what it is & what it's nature is for??
APK
P.S.=> Optimization is always "push/pull" (one area gains, but usually, another possibly may suffer, depending on HOW you use your machine)... & these 2 entries in particular, imo, have this as a potential loss in the long-haul, but short-term gain... apk