Kenneth Farver wrote:
I believe you just put the operating system and (Maybe?) the programs on it. Then you would put your library on the Sata 3 hard drive.
yea, thats how i have it. just installed lr4 to the ssd and point the catalogs to a sata 3 drive.
When I built mine I used a 128gb SSD .
I installed windows + LR4 + PS (and also office) on the SSD . I just let the program's use their defaults . I have the LRCAT FILE and the previews on the SSD. And it runs real quick .
I will add that I changed the previews settings so that I clear out the previews pretty quickly , that way I don't have previews of images I'm not likely to need to view for a while tacking up room on my SSD
This has come up a few times in the last few months.
I have 2 SSDs in my PC, so i've been able to play a bit with configurations.
- Using an SSD to boot off, and using default LR configuration (temp files and ACR cache held on C gives a huge speedup over using a conventional hard disk.
- In contrast to Ian i have found that hosting the LR catalogue on an SSD (in this case the second SSD) didn't make any noticeable difference over having it on a spinning disk. I found the same when hosting the images i am editing on the second SSD. The reason for this i think is that the image rendering in LR is very processor intensive, and that the rendering time is sufficiently long as to mask the time it takes to read from disk. I am using a brand new Intel i5 3570K clocked at 4.2Ghz, so i am not exactly processor limited on this
I'm running two Intel 80GB SSD's and two 7200 rpm disks. I put the OS on one SSD, MS swap file, PS cache, Bridge cache on the other SSD. The only thing SSD's may not be best at is storing very large files (movies). Newer SSD's are better at this than my old pair. SSD's are VERY fast at reading and writing small files, such as those I put on my second SSD...
It will vary a bit with how you use Lr. e.g. I often whiz through lots of photos in the Develop module and/or in the Library module and so the file access/retrieval/storage time is relatively significant. Others might spend far more time per photo and in that case their editing/viewing time far outweighs the file access/retrieval/storage time.
My preference is as follows:
OS and all software on the SSD to make the whole computer feel snappy.
Lr catalog on the SSD to speed up Lr.
Lr previews on the SSD to speed up the Catalog module and to a lesser extent the Develop module.
ACR cache on the SSD to speed up the Develop module.
For initial file transfers from camera cards to the computer I put my files into a dedicated Lr auto-import folder on the SSD and work on them there because that is faster. Once the bulk of the work such as rating, labelling, preliminary editing, keywording, etc. has been done I use Lr to transfer them to a permanent home onto a slower HDD. They'll generally get less editing done on them there and the preview cache on the SSD may be all that Lr needs to let me see them quickly in future.
I have the Samsung 830 128gb especially for photo editing. LR, the database and the images captured and those that need editing are all on the same SSD.
Photoshop is on another SSD (and older Intel), including the cache.
I think best is to put everything on an SSD, if you have the room.
Is it worth the upgrade if there is no chance you will have the lrcat on the ssd? I'm shooting weddings with two Nikon d800's, and my last wedding was about 90gb's. I'm storing the lrcats on a series of 2tb drives in the other bays. I've been considering the move to an ssd to help offset the slowdown the files sizes are amusing, but am not sure how much it will really help.
The machine is an 8 core xeon Mac Pro with 16gb of ram, if it matters.
jared_irl wrote:
Is it worth the upgrade if there is no chance you will have the lrcat on the ssd? I'm shooting weddings with two Nikon d800's, and my last wedding was about 90gb's. I'm storing the lrcats on a series of 2tb drives in the other bays. I've been considering the move to an ssd to help offset the slowdown the files sizes are amusing, but am not sure how much it will really help.
The machine is an 8 core xeon Mac Pro with 16gb of ram, if it matters.
It is generally worth the upgrade to run your operating system from an SSD. Everything is snappier. Having tried hosting my Ircat on an SSD i have moved it back to a normal spinning disk for convenience as i didn't see any noticeable speed up. I still host the ACR temp directory on an SSD though.
