Jump to content
Piriform Community Forums
Alan_B

Winapp2.ini on skates - making it 40 times faster.

Recommended Posts

ALAN...just noticed. Are the @_#_8_BAD_MINI.LST and @_#_7_BAD_FULL.LST supposed to be in both the folder runng the BAT file and #TRIMMER folder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.

If the latest WinApp2.ini has no new entries for the user - which is my normal experience,

then no benefit will come from over-writing the old ini with a younger identical version.

You can see they are the same if the file sizes are the same.

 

It is then appropriate to remove #TRIMMER.

All that you need is retained in the parent folder.

 

2.

Sorry, I was desperately hungry for a meal so failed to elaborate - here goes :-

 

If you do not (P)reserve then check-boxes for the volatile detections will come and go.

If you preserve, then on my system I initially get this :-

 

 

  YOU  MUST  NOT  "Run Cleaner"  -  ONLY  Click "Analyze"
 After Analysis please CLOSE CCleaner so script may continue.
Press any key to continue . . .
17:19:25.00 - 17:19:18.93  = 6070 mSec  = Using "CCLEANER64.EXE /DEBUG"
17:19:25.06 - 17:19:25.00  = 60 mSec	= Built #_CCLEANER.LST
17:19:25.15 - 17:19:25.08  = 70 mSec	= 65 off TRIMMED Config Blocks
	..\@_#_7_BAD_FULL.LST (+21) Will Include 17 of 21 Config Blocks
	..\@_#_8_BAD_MINI.LST (+4) Will Include 17 of 25 Config Blocks
	..\#_Exclude.txt Excluded 6 of 7 Config Blocks

CREATING NEW WINAPP2.INI and #_DEBUG_WINAPP2.INI
Found 65 + (Include 17 of 25) - (Exclude 6 of 7) - (Anomalies 0) = 76 Configs
17:19:33.31 - 17:19:25.34  = 7970 mSec  = Minimized WINAPP2 (+ debug)[/font]

There are 65 Detections that trigger on my system, i.e. 61 permanent + 4 volatiles

 

The whole download has 21 volatiles

..\@_#_7_BAD_FULL.LST (+21)

That holds +21 volatile detecions, but CCleaner /DEBUG has already found 4, so only 17 of 21 are additional includes

 

..\@_#_8_BAD_MINI.LST (+4)

These are the 4 volatiles just found in my new mini-wini,

This brings the total number of configs under consideration to 25,

but they are already part of the 21 already considered so there is no increase above 17.

 

With 76 Configs = 76 detections CCleaner.exe launches super-fast compared to using the 743 entries of maxi-Wini

By deleting *_FULL.LST there would be only 59 detections, making CCleaner.exe launch 20% faster than super-fast :)

If *_FULL.LST is retained then *_MINI.LST wastes only a few mSec creating Mini-Wini, but has zero effect on the CCleaner.exe launch

 

I allow the user to delete which-ever, but allow an "optimum" configuration by default.

 

Regards

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan, I'm curious to see whether or not changing over to Detect= has been having a significant effect on load speeds. When the next version of winapp2.ini comes out (the day of V3.16) do you think you could run your diagnostics again with regards to load speed? There are, of course, a great deal more entries than there were previously, however well over 100 have been changed to registry detects now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my system less than 10% of WinApp2.ini is applicable.

A trimmed Winapp2.ini allows CC to Analyze within about one Second.

A full Sized 181 kB Winapp2.ini takes approx 3 maybe 4 seconds-ish.

 

Unfortunately Windows 7 Ultimate GUI lacks the alacrity of good old DOS 3.32.

and there is no "snap-action" to the Analyze Button;

it is solid greyed out and inactive for the first couple of seconds,

and gradually over the next couple of seconds it warms-up into an "active" appearance.

 

I do not fancy trying to make any repeatable measurements with the GUI as it stands,

neither do I fancy making the GUI more snappy by diving into the depths of Windows - Dragons be Here :o

 

I will however work on a script that can accurately measure how long it takes "CCleaner /AUTO" to run and close,

and once the system has been cleaned this should give repeatable measurements.

 

I will post the script when good.

 

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are the results on my machine, measuring the time taken from launch till close of CCleaner /Auto.

 

1. Using Raw 181 kB download v1.0.120206 with 770 entries :-

 

12:05:08.57 - 12:05:02.28 = 6290 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

12:05:18.78 - 12:05:12.57 = 6210 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

12:05:28.82 - 12:05:22.44 = 6380 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

12:05:40.69 - 12:05:34.39 = 6300 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

 

2. Using Trimmed 17 kB version v1.0.120206 with only the 69 entries relevant to my system :-

 

12:06:21.52 - 12:06:20.11 = 1410 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

12:06:26.27 - 12:06:24.88 = 1390 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

12:06:32.26 - 12:06:30.84 = 1420 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

12:06:44.56 - 12:06:43.13 = 1430 mSec = Time taken to launch and close

 

I get repeatable results by blocking the Internet and disabling my anti-malware protection

 

You can benchmark on your system(s) and observe the effect of using Detect vs. DetecFile.

 

Regards

Alan

CC_Time.txt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, running with my full (untrimmed) file (780 entries currently) vs v1.0.120206 takes about 500ms longer. Seems quite stark, considering it's only 10 entries more.

 

I can't be sure that the difference is caused by using detects and not by the extra entries (actually it's 11 more entries, as 1 has been removed)

 

Perhaps querying the registry actually has a negative impacton performance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also running a trimmed file, it takes about 1400ms to open, run and close, but I have 112 entries relevant to my computer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it back! Turns out registry detections /are/ faster! :)

 

 

Using the latest set of detect changes (http://forum.piriform.com/index.php?showtopic=32310&pid=210491&st=1320entry210491)

 

compared to the same file with them still as DetectFiles yielded about a 50ms faster time.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you are saying an installed version is faster then a portable version.

 

No, I'm 98% sure that he's saying it's easier for CCleaner to check the registry to see if a program exists than it does for it to check a file location

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are saying an installed version is faster then a portable version.

Probably not.

The Portable version looks in the registry to see what applications are installed and merit cleaning.

 

What any Portable version should NEVER do is write to the registry.

CCleaner Portable is in the clean group, and it is only the operating system that chooses to track applications.

There are "Dirty" Portable applications that deliberately write to the registry and hope to undo the harm by subsequently restoring the registry - unless they crash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ninja Nergal strikes again :)

photobomb-that-guy-the-real-ninja.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to include a function which sorts all comment lines out (they start with a semicolon ";")? Reason: I want to comment some of the entries in the complete version of winapp2.ini, but those comments shouldn't make it into the trimmed version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest two instant solutions of a command to issue to a command prompt

E:\T\CCleaner\New\SRT>find ";" < winapp2.ini > comment.txt

E:\T\CCleaner\New\SRT>find ";apm" < winapp2.ini > comment-apm.txt

E:\T\CCleaner\New\SRT>dir comm*.*
Volume in drive E is E_GPT_E
Volume Serial Number is C044-40A5

Directory of E:\T\CCleaner\New\SRT

19/02/2012  15:36				 0 comment-apm.txt
19/02/2012  15:36			 1,110 comment.txt
		   2 File(s)		  1,110 bytes
		   0 Dir(s)  92,753,928,192 bytes free

 

Upon inspection :-

comment.txt holds the 11 lines at the start of the file, plus these two embedded line

;This goes here as it is short for "Chromium Temp Files"

;uses its cleaning path as a Detect path as well.

 

comment-apm.txt is empty because there is no comment starting with ;apm :rolleyes:

 

Would you be happy issuing a command on a command line,

or is your requirement more complex ?

If you want I can easily add to Trim.bat an extra output file which holds only comments

 

Alternatively, perhaps you just want to REMOVE all comments,

in which case you need the command

find /V ";" < winapp2.ini > no-comment.txt

That too is easy, but it hits every user with an extra 181 kByte file, or yet another option to (S)kip

 

Regards

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternatively, perhaps you just want to REMOVE all comments, in which case you need the command

find /V ";" < winapp2.ini > no-comment.txt

That too is easy, but it hits every user with an extra 181 kByte file, or yet another option to (S)kip

 

Thank you very much for your fast reply. Yes, I just want to remove all my comments before I trim the winapp2.ini. I'm happy with the command line command, so you do not have to add it to your official Trim.bat version. Thanks again! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trim_11.txt attached.

Rename as Trim_11.bat and you are "good to go".

 

Principle benefit :-

 

It gives the extra option to "Organize" the Entries and reduce Chaos to zero.

The latest WinApp2.ini (Version: v1.0.120223) has "Chaos Factor 79", which is the number of non-alphabetic-sequence entries as seen by FC.EXE

 

Secondary benefit :-

When replacing the downloaded WinApp2.ini with the trimmed / reduced variant it now overcomes "Read Only"

( I do not know if the WinApp2.ini Download site or my Pale Moon Browser was having a "bad hair day" - but one of the downloads was Read Only)

 

Alan

TRIM_11.txt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect timing...I was just going to PM you snd see if any more updates.

 

Now that we are up to v11, any changelog or instructions on what has changed or has not....mainly for new users who have not been following.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×