After Any Fly, any action takes a long time.

After Fly everytime, all actions use to take long time to complete. But since today's update, seems that it's taking i'd say 4x more times.

I loaded a simple mission to land, only me and the airport, no more units.

Landed, then it took at least 3 minutes to be possible to use the editor again.

In editor, i clicked on Exit and took more 3 minutes to gt back to main menu.

On Game, when click to View buttons assigments it takes at least 30 seconds to open window, and it freaks everything online because once i clicked on "Buttons Settings", game freezes till buttons appears.

My system is at least 2x more more than cappable to run DCS, but it's getting more and more hard to play, since those freezing are happening more and more.

It's even faster, if when mission finishes, click on Taskmanager and kill DCS process and open again.

Also, Private Bytes on Taskmanager shows Always a value greater than 5Gb being used by DSC, and memory, sometimes reaching 20Gb.

It's a memory leak for sure, and a long time is being a PITA, but today is almos unplayable

I assume you have DCS installed on a HDD?

Do you have a SSD

I assume you have DCS installed on a HDD?

 

Do you have a SSD

No, it's installed on a RAID 5 system, btw the data I/O seems fine.

Hi

 

try a cleanup and repair, guide in my signature.

 

Makes sure DCS is running with administration rights in windows and your antivirus is not tempering with the load ( try adding dcs to its white list )

 

Also I would go for a fresh dcs saved games folder to ensure there is not a settings issue or corrupted shader.

 

rename your dcs folder here ( keep it as a backup it has your inputs folder and we can move it to the new one )

 

C:\Users\yourname\Saved Games\DCS

 

once that is done restart DCS redo all of your desired settings, the first time you load should take a little longer as it is loading shaders.

 

hope it helps, if not attach your dcs.log we may find some clues

Sure thing, i'll do this soon as can! I'll post logs too.

Also, i realised that when you re-enter ME after testing a mission, it loads a corrupted mission, deleted units reapearing, units disappearing, it's like the mission has returned to the last state before savin.. And if you don't realize this and save again, you'll screw everything.

So, if i test a mission, exit, and have the patience to wait, the mission will not be the same. Even if i open it again via "Open File", some strange behaviors will occur, like when clicking, old units will reappear on zone of clicks.

Raid-5 is an I/O desaster by definition.

3 drives or more have to sync before anything happens !!!

Read some Whitepapers about Raid levels.

The ONE AND ONLY Raid that is NOT SLOWER in I/O than a SINGLE drive is RAID-1, PERIOD.

This is one of the few things that is hammered in stone.

in addition, I would not consider Raid-5 if not on a dedicated, hardware accelerated Adpater, like LSI or Adaptec. Once you have to rebuild it you will find out what I mean.

Your overhead is so HUGE and it is done by your CPU that you should only consider Raid-1 or RAID-0 on Intel ICHx's. Seen it too often and I only use Adaptec for this reason, and a few other reasons ( on servers ).

AMD RAid is even worse !

Raid-5 is an I/O desaster by definition.

 

3 drives or more have to sync before anything happens !!!

 

Read some Whitepapers about Raid levels.

 

The ONE AND ONLY Raid that is NOT SLOWER in I/O than a SINGLE drive is RAID-1, PERIOD.

 

This is one of the few things that is hammered in stone.

 

in addition, I would not consider Raid-5 if not on a dedicated, hardware accelerated Adpater, like LSI or Adaptec. Once you have to rebuild it you will find out what I mean.

 

Your overhead is so HUGE and it is done by your CPU that you should only consider Raid-1 or RAID-0 on Intel ICHx's. Seen it too often and I only use Adaptec for this reason, and a few other reasons ( on servers ).

 

AMD RAid is even worse !

While the above is technically true (and for HW based Raid 1), Raid 0 (disk striping) can improve I/O. So if you want the best possible performance above all else, RAID 0 is the way to go. With the usual caveat emptor about RAID 0.

While the above is technically true (and for HW based Raid 1), Raid 0 (disk striping) can improve I/O. So if you want the best possible performance above all else, RAID 0 is the way to go. With the usual caveat emptor about RAID 0.

I dont think so Hans,

those two drives need to sync also before anything moves across the channel, once synced they have a wider stream ( 2 drives feed the channel ).

The only case where this is true is if you need data THAT SAMLL that it doesnt get striped 1st place but that again, it is one drive only.

Raid has many benefits, especially Raid-1, Raid-6 and Raid-60 but I/O is inferior in any case compared to single drive.

Say you need lots of small reads and writes, those scenarios will suffer when raided, regardless which Raid you choose, unless Raid-1.

The benefit of RAID is fault tolerance ( hence I use Raid-6 or 60 ) and ease of expanding its size, data integrity after power outages with Battery backup ( mandatory for enterprises ), and real high streaming bandwidth where I/O is not critical like 4k video editing or such.