what the fuck is my hard drive writing after a file is done copying.

Are you sure that you're hard drive doesn't have errors (physical or with the filesystem) ?

Have you tried other filesystems?

Any filesystem, even sockets, keep data cached in the kernel before it's received by the application. So that your IO operation doesn't block too long.

>>59041836
the cache is usually like 500mb
even in the latest edition of windows

and it is certainly not writing out any cache shit

>>59041789

mate dont be a cunt

>>59041775
It's probably showing it's done copying because the RAM cached frontend has it copied. I use Linux and ext4 and I don't know how similar Windows and Linux are with this but it's such an obvious technique I'd expect Windows to have something similar.

My HDD has a sequential speed of about 100MB/s. So at best I'd expect copying a 1GB file to require 10s of reading and 10s of writing. Yet copying a 1GB file often takes about 12s. However if I give a sync command immediately afterwards,which synchronizes all my filesystems with the in RAM cache, it blocks for about 10 seconds. If I don't do the sync it just does it in the background whenever it figures the best time is. If nothing else is competing for the HDD's attention that's right away.

File: 1483585875775.jpg (23KB, 439x290px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 439x290px

throw your hdd against a wall and stomp it out like a mix raced aborted fetus

>>59042000
checked
>the cache is usually like 500mb

Is that actual info? I figured all OSes used whatever RAM isn't being used as cache. Unless I've just booted my cache files are pretty much anything my programs aren't using and my integrated GPU hasn't stolen. I've got about 4.3GB in cache now.

>>59042142
>Is that actual info?

does it have to be?
i dont think i present it as actual info but rather just a simple estimate

whats wrong today bro? is something on your mind to be acting like such a cunt?

>>59042211

u are not being a cunt sorry
i have been arguing with a lot of cunts

>>59042211
>does it have to be?
I don't know. A flat 500MB limit seems low. Dropping a file from cache when a program needs the space is fast. You delete the entry in your table or whatever data structure you have to keep track of cache. Then you just allocate the memory like you would have.