Database Develop

Linux Swap Question

So does this still ruin your sd card faster than normal like swapper did?
How much faster?

xenoaurora said:
So does this still ruin your sd card faster than normal like swapper did?
How much faster?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically correct answer - Yes, it will ruin your card much faster than normal.
Real world answer - You're talking about lifespans in the single digit years rather than double digit years. Modern flash memory can handle insane numbers of writes and the onboard controllers automatically spread data out to keep the wear even. Also, error correction on the card will simply disable worn out bits and keep running on the rest.
Simply put - use the heck out of the card. If you haven't upgraded it, in a few years you'll start loosing capacity, a few bits at a time. I wouldn't worry about it.

Alot faster if you're using a hero ROM. We're talking about 2 good years of usage with the SD card running swapper.

How much of a performance boost do you get?

Gimpeh said:
How much of a performance boost do you get?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt you'll notice it on a cupcake ROM. However it is very noticable on hero ROM

Gimpeh said:
How much of a performance boost do you get?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It depends on the ROM and how you use the phone.. I use CM and I haven't really seen any speedup with a swap. What it does for me is keep my browser in memory longer when I switch out to do something else quick (reply to a text, for instance). On the other hand, it sounds like Hero users almost need a swap to make the system usable.. Just depends on what ROM you use and how you use it.

[Q] Low available Ram !!!

Hey Guys ... Did you look to the Ram status in the Galaxy Note ???
I have 600+/800 usage in normal situations !!! and when I clear ram it reached to 400+ which goes back to more than 600 Mb after moderate usage !!! what about in your Notes guys ??? Any solution for this ?? plz comments ....

What is it you are planning on doing with the free ram? Has the use of ram caused any problems? Don't worry about it and use the device. There is no point in trying to worry about something which is being used or not being used which is not affecting you in any way. Until it does have fun with the phone.

Do you think Android is running on air? The Note has 1GB RAM which the OS takes 200MB at boot. The rest is used by apps and other things. If you're not going to use the RAM, then why do you need it?
"My computer uses 50MB of RAM, And i have 32GB of it!" WHAT'S THE POINT?!

Try RAM Manager by Juwe. Be aware that the more memory you free up the worse multitasking will be.

Are you kidding me? Use RAM Manager when your device has 1GB of it? Please slap me as hard as you can.

This thread needs to be deleted.
RAM is there to be used.
I would use 100% of my RAM 100% of the time if I could. If it's not being used, it's being wasted.

Unused RAM is totally wasted. When 2GB devices come out OMG my device is using 1GB out of my 2GB!!!

To each his own, who are you to tell others what to do with their RAM? I'm not your typical "as much free memory as possible freak" but how comes that when I kill some apps before running something more intensive it's usually smoother and performs better?

pjm77 said:
To each his own, who are you to tell others what to do with their RAM? I'm not your typical "as much free memory as possible freak" but how comes that when I kill some apps before running something more intensive it's usually smoother and performs better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've never had to manually kill apps with my G-Note, so I dont know what your doing wrong, Could be a faulty device as far as I can tell.

Thanks for your advice, I'm running to get it replaced.

pjm77 said:
Thanks for your advice, I'm running to get it replaced.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
600mb usage is totally normal on moderate use. Obviously you don't know how RAM Management work on Android. Go and replace your phone but nothing will change.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA App

Would you replace your computer because it's using to much RAM?
Chances are you would find the RAM hog and keep it from starting up when not neccesary.
600mb is normal usage.... if you are not happy with that high of usage delete the apps that have services running or are always in the background. Android does this for you as you approach full RAM usage anyways though...

garytube said:
600mb usage is totally normal on moderate use. Obviously you don't know how RAM Management work on Android. Go and replace your phone but nothing will change.
Ever heard of irony?
Of course I'm not gonna get it replaced I'm happy with the way it is.
Yes, I've read about Android memory management quite a while ago. Very smart and very convincing. Now on the other hand - every now and then after some intense moments - let's say I'm driving and I'm using offline satnav then online satnav then there is a phonecall, then I make a voice note, I get out, send a text, use my GTD app and whatever else - after hours of such use when I get home, stretch my legs and I fancy to play let's say Galaxy on Fire 2, I find it smoother and less likely to crash if I just press "kill all apps" button in Task Manager. And since I installed RAM Manager I don't have to do it. And I haven't noticed any side effects that would interfere with my style of using my phone.
So guess what - I really don't give a **** about Android memory management and all expert opinions because I know what works for me and I'm happy with that state of things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

pjm77 said:
garytube said:
600mb usage is totally normal on moderate use. Obviously you don't know how RAM Management work on Android. Go and replace your phone but nothing will change.
Ever heard of irony?
Of course I'm not gonna get it replaced I'm happy with the way it is.
Yes, I've read about Android memory management quite a while ago. Very smart and very convincing. Now on the other hand - every now and then after some intense moments - let's say I'm driving and I'm using offline satnav then online satnav then there is a phonecall, then I make a voice note, I get out, send a text, use my GTD app and whatever else - after hours of such use when I get home, stretch my legs and I fancy to play let's say Galaxy on Fire 2, I find it smoother and less likely to crash if I just press "kill all apps" button in Task Manager. And since I installed RAM Manager I don't have to do it. And I haven't noticed any side effects that would interfere with my style of using my phone.
So guess what - I really don't give a **** about Android memory management and all expert opinions because I know what works for me and I'm happy with that state of things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I liked your response, but it's not irony, it's sarcasm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

pjm77 said:
garytube said:
600mb usage is totally normal on moderate use. Obviously you don't know how RAM Management work on Android. Go and replace your phone but nothing will change.
Ever heard of irony?
Of course I'm not gonna get it replaced I'm happy with the way it is.
Yes, I've read about Android memory management quite a while ago. Very smart and very convincing. Now on the other hand - every now and then after some intense moments - let's say I'm driving and I'm using offline satnav then online satnav then there is a phonecall, then I make a voice note, I get out, send a text, use my GTD app and whatever else - after hours of such use when I get home, stretch my legs and I fancy to play let's say Galaxy on Fire 2, I find it smoother and less likely to crash if I just press "kill all apps" button in Task Manager. And since I installed RAM Manager I don't have to do it. And I haven't noticed any side effects that would interfere with my style of using my phone.
So guess what - I really don't give a **** about Android memory management and all expert opinions because I know what works for me and I'm happy with that state of things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it looks like to me that you posted in this thread just to promote RAM Manager
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

TeeeJaay said:
pjm77 said:
it looks like to me that you posted in this thread just to promote RAM Manager
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I posted in this thread beacuse another user complained about the problem that I came across and found solution to. It's certainly not the best one, but it's the one that works for me.
In the meantime I got ridiculed by more social-oriented users who need to accept and be accepted. To which I got upset and posted some crap. As a result I hijacked the thread. I apologize and shut up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

LordManhattan said:
Are you kidding me? Use RAM Manager when your device has 1GB of it? Please slap me as hard as you can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung makes us fool it has only 800MB RAM. Even i thought it was 1GB.

It has 1GB. 200MB is reserved for the system.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

Memory usage
My daughter started a game where a photo is used in the programme, and I got the message "Free RAM low, resolution of photo reduced". Had to kill running services to be able to run it without the reduced resolution. Checked the overall Galaxy Note ram usage and just out of the box I have around 230mb free of RAM, I have an HTC Desire HD (768 ram) that has the same free and it is filled with running apps. When you get that kind of messages from a new phone, from some ****ty simple kid programme before I have even filled it up with stuff I get really annoyed. When I kill all I can i can get max up to 400mb.

Yup, TouchWiz is a greedy RAM eating whore. Wait for CM9 and then you'll see why custom UIs like TouchWiz and Sense is bull****.
Sent from my iPad GT-N7000 using xda premium

[Q] how can i increase ram of my samsung galaxy ace

how to make virtual ram in galaxy ace rooted s5830.....running ics'ed by snowpluralism....
n do it helps in smooth runnings...
and any disadvantages:highfive:

Ashish924 said:
how to make virtual ram in galaxy ace rooted s5830.....running ics'ed by snowpluralism....
n do it helps in smooth runnings...
and any disadvantages:highfive:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, you can use a swap partition. CM7+ also has ram compression.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2

NathanBookham said:
Well, you can use a swap partition. CM7+ also has ram compression.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
can u help me in that...i dont know how to do it...n also is it safe and effective....thanks

Ashish924 said:
can u help me in that...i dont know how to do it...n also is it safe and effective....thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google for it. XDA is against spoon-feeding..!!
___________XDA Premium__________
Don't be a noob. Be a newbie..!!
Details here.
____________________________________

I've tried swapper 2, it's good. But have to understand each term they use in the app. Currently I'm now on RamExpander. Very good.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using xda app-developers app

DuckyDawn said:
I've tried swapper 2, it's good. But have to understand each term they use in the app. Currently I'm now on RamExpander. Very good.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me Ramexpander say is not compatible with Ace.

I heard swapping partition from sd card to increase the ram, sd card might get damaged!!, is it true?

Reduces SD Life so yes.
Sent from my iPhone

but i guess you will change your sd card before it gets damaged so much, that you will notice.
i only had this once on a USB pendrive. it loses data since some weeks ago. but its about 8 years old.
lets say that todays SD cards have better lifetime than years old USB sticks. lets also say that you use your sd card more often than i used this stick (backups later car-radio). so we can say your SD card might have a bit less lifetime. lets say 6 years. in 6 years you will (most likely) have a new phone, sd cards are "oldies" and if not, 1TB cards are state-of-the-art.
so....yes you loose lifetime but i dont think you will use it till it "dies"

CJCord said:
but i guess you will change your sd card before it gets damaged so much, that you will notice.
i only had this once on a USB pendrive. it loses data since some weeks ago. but its about 8 years old.
lets say that todays SD cards have better lifetime than years old USB sticks. lets also say that you use your sd card more often than i used this stick (backups later car-radio). so we can say your SD card might have a bit less lifetime. lets say 6 years. in 6 years you will (most likely) have a new phone, sd cards are "oldies" and if not, 1TB cards are state-of-the-art.
so....yes you loose lifetime but i dont think you will use it till it "dies"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It really depends on use. When I swapped i ate through my sdcard in less than 6 months.. so there you go. Keeping low swappinness will increase sd card life, but it does depend on use.

increasing ram by swapping sd card is effective to what extent...can any body tell me....does it bridge the gap of our low ram...
AND ANY OTHER DISADVANTAGE THAN REDUCING SD CARD LIFE

Blackstard said:
For me Ramexpander say is not compatible with Ace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh? I Don get u cozy mine is working fine. Downloaded from blackmarket
Sent from my GT-S5830 using xda app-developers app

Ashish924 said:
increasing ram by swapping sd card is effective to what extent...can any body tell me....does it bridge the gap of our low ram...
AND ANY OTHER DISADVANTAGE THAN REDUCING SD CARD LIFE
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That why the requirement need class 10 SDcard

You can use CM7 that uses less RAM!.. I just went from CM10 to CM7 and it really is an improvement for ACE as it uses a bit less RAM and that is noticeable.

thanx but no cm7
Jimmyslam said:
You can use CM7 that uses less RAM!.. I just went from CM10 to CM7 and it really is an improvement for ACE as it uses a bit less RAM and that is noticeable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks...but i dont want cm7 as i dont like it....i want it in a stock rom...btw thanx

Ashish924 said:
how to make virtual ram in galaxy ace rooted s5830.....running ics'ed by snowpluralism....
n do it helps in smooth runnings...
and any disadvantages:highfive:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there are quite a few apps for increasing the ram like ramexpander and swapper...
but before using these apps remember that the read and write speed of sd card(which is secondary storage) is vey less as compared to that of the internal ram.. and probably thats why ram is very expensive as compared to sd card...
so if you use these apps may take a bit longer to start and even the best of sd cards i.e. the class 10 one won't last longer than 6 months...

Increasing ram
Hi i install ram manager pro apk on gts5830i then i create a swap file 128mb using this apk, then on sd card i see swap file img does it mean my phone ram increased.... i didn't install any kernel for it... plz does tell me if it increase ram or not...

I tried something on a other phone from my neighbor. is a huawei with same specs than the galaxy ace..
I moved apps to SD card with link2SD and created a Swap file in the internal storage.
The internal storage is much faster than the SD card and much better for swap file.

sahil chandel said:
Hi i install ram manager pro apk on gts5830i then i create a swap file 128mb using this apk, then on sd card i see swap file img does it mean my phone ram increased.... i didn't install any kernel for it... plz does tell me if it increase ram or not...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is RAM
Random Access Memory (RAM) is temporary data storage that the CPU uses during calculations. The more RAM a device has, the more calculated results the CPU can store - which means less time the CPU has to do the same thing over and over again. In other words, the CPU can check RAM to see if it has already made a particular calculation in the recent past. If it has, it can use the pre-computed results instead of wasting processing time recomputing the same calculation. In short, more RAM means a more efficient (and faster) device.
SWAP
What is SWAP
Swap is, in short, virtual RAM. With swap, a small portion of the hard drive is set aside and used like RAM. The computer will attempt to keep as much information as possible in RAM until the RAM is full. At that point, the computer will begin moving inactive blocks of memory (called pages) to the hard disk, freeing up RAM for active processes. If one of the pages on the hard disk needs to be accessed again, it will be moved back into RAM, and a different inactive page in RAM will be moved onto the hard disk ('swapped'). The trade off is disks and SD cards are considerably slower than physical RAM, so when something needs to be swapped, there is a noticeable performance hit.
Unlike traditional swap, Android's Memory Manager kills inactive processes to free up memory. Android signals to the process, then the process will usually write out a small bit of specific information about its state (for example, Google Maps may write out the map view coordinates; Browser might write the URL of the page being viewed) and then the process exits. When you next access that application, it is restarted: the application is loaded from storage, and retrieves the state information that it saved when it last closed. In some applications, this makes it seem as if the application never closed at all. This is not much different from traditional swap, except that Android apps are specially programed to write out very specific information, making Android's Memory Manager more efficient that swap.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Credits go to CarlDeanCatabay

Is it normal only 1,5 gb ram free?

When I reboot the tablet and look the free ram memory only have 1,5 ram free, is it the normal when this tab has 3 gb ram? I have thunderrom and skyhigh kernel installed.

Yep. It's for most of the android processes and important things that need to run. I also get that much too.
Sent from SMT800 using Tapatalk.
-Helper around Tab S forums√
Active Everyday√

yeiyei0891 said:
When I reboot the tablet and look the free ram memory only have 1,5 ram free, is it the normal when this tab has 3 gb ram? I have thunderrom and skyhigh kernel installed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup that's totally normal I'm running cm12 and it's using 1.5GB.

I'm on stock, non rooted and using ES Explorers task killer i can still have about 1.4GB free.

Ok, then 3gb RAM but really you can use less that half of it.

Yep. But hey at least we got 3 GB of ram instead of 2 GB!
Sent from SMT800 using Tapatalk.
-Helper around Tab S forums√
Active Everyday√

DUHAsianSKILLZ said:
Yep. But hey at least we got 3 GB of ram instead of 2 GB!
Sent from SMT800 using Tapatalk.
-Helper around Tab S forums√
Active Everyday√
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah i get 2GB to use because my system uses 1GB

yeiyei0891 said:
Ok, then 3gb RAM but really you can use less that half of it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do wish people would actually learn about RAM and why free RAM is actually wasted RAM.
A good summary can be found here: http://m.androidcentral.com/ram-what-it-how-its-used-and-why-you-shouldnt-care

foxmeister said:
I do wish people would actually learn about RAM and why free RAM is actually wasted RAM.
A good summary can be found here: http://m.androidcentral.com/ram-what-it-how-its-used-and-why-you-shouldnt-care
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but otoh caching boat load of stuff into ram that won't be used is a waste of battery.
I look at the list of running processes with a system monitor and I have to say WTF does it just load every thing or what. It's running apps I don't even use any more but haven't uninstalled just in case. So if I don't want them running I have to freeze them. And that does not include all the system processes whose purpose I can't even tell. It's kind of nuts.

foxmeister said:
I do wish people would actually learn about RAM and why free RAM is actually wasted RAM.
A good summary can be found here: http://m.androidcentral.com/ram-what-it-how-its-used-and-why-you-shouldnt-care
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but you should start to learn yourself. The RAM displayed as free is actually used as a file cache. Besides, Android killing apps in the background means that it takes longer to start a new app in a low RAM situation (because the new app needs to wait until the LMK cleared enough space) and of course you lose the context of the closed app (it needs to reload data from the internal storage or even worse from the web when you restart it).

TheGoD said:
Sorry but you should start to learn yourself. The RAM displayed as free is actually used as a file cache. Besides, Android killing apps in the background means that it takes longer to start a new app in a low RAM situation (because the new app needs to wait until the LMK cleared enough space) and of course you lose the context of the closed app (it needs to reload data from the internal storage or even worse from the web when you restart it).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you in a low RAM situation when you have 1GB free out of 3GB? NO! 0.5GB out of 3GB? NO!
Does it take a significant amount if time to reclaim resources when android does require additional RAM, because it genuinely is in a low RAM situation? No, because it unceremoniously terminates unused processes, releasing resources to the kernel almost immediately. This is very different from garbage collection to release unused memory from active processes.
Don't just believe me though - take it from the people who actually wrote the OS - http://android-developers.blogspot.de/2010/04/multitasking-android-way.html?m=1
It's also worth saying that you've also validated my statement "Free RAM is wasted RAM" by saying that the OS "uses" free RAM as a file cache.
All that being said, the context of this entire thread is why the OS is "using" 1.5GB out of 3GB pretty much at boot. All I've said is why this is perfectly normal, and in the general usage case, actually not undesirable.
Of couse there will be specific usage cases, where this is not going to be the optimum approach, but this is only going to affect a very small minority of users, with extremely memory demanding applications.

barth2 said:
Yeah but otoh caching boat load of stuff into ram that won't be used is a waste of battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. RAM impact on battery life is, for all practical purposes, insensitive to the amount of RAM being used. When sections of RAM are clear, the locations are not zeroed out or anything. Instead the space is just added to a free space table. Stuff in RAM not being used does not waste battery. The exception to this is if that RAM is being occupied by a misbehaving program that is driving CPU usage.
foxmeister said:
Are you in a low RAM situation when you have 1GB free out of 3GB? NO! 0.5GB out of 3GB? NO!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Foxmeister is exactly right. In nearly all real world cases, higher RAM usage leads to faster performance and better battery life.

GeorgeP said:
No. RAM impact on battery life is, for all practical purposes, insensitive to the amount of RAM being used. When sections of RAM are clear, the locations are not zeroed out or anything. Instead the space is just added to a free space table. Stuff in RAM not being used does not waste battery. The exception to this is if that RAM is being occupied by a misbehaving program that is driving CPU usage.
Foxmeister is exactly right. In nearly all real world cases, higher RAM usage leads to faster performance and better battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, but you still have to get the data into RAM. That takes power, which it is wasted if the data is never used.

barth2 said:
No, but you still have to get the data into RAM. That takes power, which it is wasted if the data is never used.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a trade off - preload the processes and data so that they can be accessed far more quickly (less lag) if and when required. Once in memory, if they are not being used the battery drain is negligible.
The reduction in perceived lag is *far* greater than any battery drain.
Regards,
Dave

barth2 said:
No, but you still have to get the data into RAM. That takes power, which it is wasted if the data is never used.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL! Now are in angels dancing on a the head of a pin territory:laugh:

GeorgeP said:
LOL! Now are in angels dancing on a the head of a pin territory:laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lag is mostly a function of user expectation.
When you open a new app that is not running, you expect a delay. So as long as it's not excessively long, you don't feel lag. unnecessary preloading then just increases bootup time and long boot up time DOES bother people.
Now it makes sense to preload frequently used apps and some system apps that have high probability of being needed. But what I was talking about is seeing apps I used once once weeks ago still get loaded, while some apps I use every session, like my browser, not loaded on start up. The algorithm needs tweaking.
(Large apps like games have long load time, but you are not going to cache those so they are not in the conversation.)
Most lags people experience is in app lag. It's mostly due to loading graphics onto the screen, screen painting, and garbage collection.
What baffles me is I have an iPad 3 (there have been 4 generations of iPads since then) , which on paper is like a Toyota Camry compared to the Tab S BMW 300. And yet on many same apps the iPad feels smoother, scrolling around is less jerky. The only place where the Tab S is superior is 3d games like asphalt with high details and because it has 3x memory, apps need reloading less.

barth2 said:
Lag is mostly a function of user expectation.
When you open a new app that is not running, you expect a delay. So as long as it's not excessively long, you don't feel lag. unnecessary preloading then just increases bootup time and long boot up time DOES bother people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The vast majority of users (i.e. the sort of user who doesn't frequent sites like XDA) probably don't reboot their tablets/phones very often at all, so most people probably aren't that bothered.
I rather suspect that the engineers at Google have experimented with an awful lot of different strategies, before settling on what we have now.
Is it perfect? No. Like everything software related, it could do with improvement but this is always a continuous, on going process
Regards,
Dave

[Q] Encryption yes or no?

I've been seeing a lot of people talking about the nexus being encrypted by default. People are of course clamoring about getting it decrypted.
At face value it seems like a good thing. Encryption will keep your stuff safe. I even noticed with TWRP that it requires the pattern unlock to mount the system/storage areas (this is also probably due to the fact I selected it to require pattern on startup). It feels like at that point, the only way to use a stolen phone is to completely factory reset it with fastboot flashing. Your data however will be safe in that regards, being removed on the reset.
The only con so far that I see is that it lowers performance. Is that it? Why are you people choosing to decrypt or leaving your device encrypted?
The device feels smooth enough with encryption on. The specs are pretty beefy, so that might be the reason behind it.

Performance doesnt bother me. Plus that can be fixed. I work in IT and have dealt with encryption to the point that I don't like it. I like control over my data even at the risk of loss/ theft.

i dont care either way about it, and have left mine encrypted. performance isnt an issue(most people dont know enough and listen to whomever said that performance takes a hit). but, performance isnt affected. what is affected is read/write gets a little slowed down, to nexus 5 levels. which isnt anything to cry about, like many are doing. performance wise, my phone hits 58000+ on antutu, and i havent seen an unencrypted phone come close to that yet.

I haven't noticed performance being an issue. I know that it will slow down benchmarks with read/write speeds but heck, I don't move a lot of files between my phone and computer. The times I do, it seems plenty fast. I'm just super curious on why so many people are asking about getting there phones decrypted.

8Fishes said:
I've been seeing a lot of people talking about the nexus being encrypted by default. People are of course clamoring about getting it decrypted.
At face value it seems like a good thing. Encryption will keep your stuff safe. I even noticed with TWRP that it requires the pattern unlock to mount the system/storage areas (this is also probably due to the fact I selected it to require pattern on startup). It feels like at that point, the only way to use a stolen phone is to completely factory reset it with fastboot flashing. Your data however will be safe in that regards, being removed on the reset.
The only con so far that I see is that it lowers performance. Is that it? Why are you people choosing to decrypt or leaving your device encrypted?
The device feels smooth enough with encryption on. The specs are pretty beefy, so that might be the reason behind it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The so called "performance issue" can only be evident when you put it after a decrypted nexus 6 which will be 0.2-0.3 seconds faster. The encryption only affect the read and write speed of internal storage but not that much

I decrypted my device when I first got it, but when I flashed the CM nightlies I accidentally forgot to flash the no encrypt zip and haven't bothered to undo it. I honestly can't tell a difference in performance.. So I feel that the benefits outweigh the cons of being encrypted

The only "performance issue" I've encountered is a longer boot time with the pass code. It's not noticeable in every day use.

SAW_JOK3R said:
The so called "performance issue" can only be evident when you put it after a decrypted nexus 6 which will be 0.2-0.3 seconds faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Storage performance isn't measured in seconds
The encryption only affect the read and write speed of internal storage but not that much
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that much?
http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/1...us-6-encrypted-vs-unencrypted-its-not-pretty/
Note that the *smallest* performance *improvement* is ONLY 100%.
The largest... 520%.
I don't think that I can agree with your definition of "not that much".

doitright said:
Storage performance isn't measured in seconds
Not that much?
http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/1...us-6-encrypted-vs-unencrypted-its-not-pretty/
Note that the *smallest* performance *improvement* is ONLY 100%.
The largest... 520%.
I don't think that I can agree with your definition of "not that much".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you use a custom kernel with the encryption patches then it is "not that much."

Hrm.. I will definitely have to try a custom kernal with the patches after everyone rebases with 5.1

doitright said:
Storage performance isn't measured in seconds
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I mean operating apps

SAW_JOK3R said:
I mean operating apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iops is the most common method of measuring storage performance. The "s" does indeed stand for "seconds".
When comparing performance of storage, you would typically look at the input/output operations per second and compare that value. However, you can also match that value on the 2 results you're comparing and see which one performed quicker that way. So you could in fact, say that something was 0.3 seconds quicker

rootSU said:
iops is the most common method of measuring storage performance. The "s" does indeed stand for "seconds".
When comparing performance of storage, you would typically look at the input/output operations per second and compare that value. However, you can also match that value on the 2 results you're comparing and see which one performed quicker that way. So you could in fact, say that something was 0.3 seconds quicker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, my statement was based only on this The R/W speed just get a bit escalated after decrypting the device. But one can easily live without such escalated speed unless he has to transfer a huge amount of p**n :silly: jk
And speed of opening apps is not even that much noticeable Persons like me will live happily with an encrypted device

rootSU said:
iops is the most common method of measuring storage performance. The "s" does indeed stand for "seconds".
When comparing performance of storage, you would typically look at the input/output operations per second and compare that value. However, you can also match that value on the 2 results you're comparing and see which one performed quicker that way. So you could in fact, say that something was 0.3 seconds quicker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iops is a complex unit, not just seconds.
---------- Post added at 05:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:59 PM ----------
SAW_JOK3R said:
I mean operating apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, the objective is to measure the speed of a car, and you are doing so by taking pictures of girls on a beach.
Brilliant.
---------- Post added at 05:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:00 PM ----------
zephiK said:
If you use a custom kernel with the encryption patches then it is "not that much."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So its only 500%... got it.

[/COLOR said:
So, the objective is to measure the speed of a car, and you are doing so by taking pictures of girls on a beach.
Brilliant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude, I'm not taking picture of girls on beach, I'm actually doing my objective Why does anyone like to decrypt a device then? It actually increase the operating power, to be specific launching time by a lil bit

My Nexus 5 on T-Mobile with good bars was easily downloading large files at 2MBPS. When I recently got a Nexus 6, all of a sudden my max sustained rate is 450KBPS in the exact same locations. Wifi did not help. Hands down it was the software encryption defaulted by lollipop. After following the xda thread to unencrypt data I am cruising at just under 2MBPS downloads again.
I have no idea why encryption would be the default without a dedicated hardware chip. All I can say is that thank the lord it was fixable. I was very unhappy to have a brand spanking new N6 be a dog compared to its year and a half older brother the N5.

SAW_JOK3R said:
I mean operating apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Second half of this video can give you an idea: http://youtu.be/FAaOONpxC48

GrayBoltWolf said:
Second half of this video can give you an idea: http://youtu.be/FAaOONpxC48
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean we should decrypt the device just to launch apps 0.3-0.4 seconds faster and a 6 seconds faster bootup? I don't always turn off my device but when it happens it's either the low battery or the force shut down bug
BTW Nice video though

SAW_JOK3R said:
dude, I'm not taking picture of girls on beach, I'm actually doing my objective
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point is that you are trying to explain the performance impact of one thing by providing measurements of something ENTIRELY UNRELATED.
Why does anyone like to decrypt a device then? It actually increase the operating power, to be specific launching time by a lil bit
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The answer to the question, is because it increases FLASH I/O PERFORMANCE. That means the speed at which data is read and written to/from flash storage. THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS LAUNCH TIME. Your second sentence is indecipherable.
A running program's performance is determined predominantly by CPU and RAM, sometimes GPU performance. NOT FLASH SPEED.
---------- Post added at 03:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:29 PM ----------
thionylx said:
I have no idea why encryption would be the default without a dedicated hardware chip. All I can say is that thank the lord it was fixable. I was very unhappy to have a brand spanking new N6 be a dog compared to its year and a half older brother the N5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, the SoC *has* hwcrypto. Its just not turned on.... yet.

doitright said:
My point is that you are trying to explain the performance impact of one thing by providing measurements of something ENTIRELY UNRELATED.
The answer to the question, is because it increases FLASH I/O PERFORMANCE. That means the speed at which data is read and written to/from flash storage. THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS LAUNCH TIME. Your second sentence is indecipherable.
A running program's performance is determined predominantly by CPU and RAM, sometimes GPU performance. NOT FLASH SPEED.
---------- Post added at 03:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:29 PM ----------
Well, the SoC *has* hwcrypto. Its just not turned on.... yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was actually trying to highlight the Basic Features