๐Ÿš€ go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: borland.public.cppbuilder.nativeapi
Article #16174

Re: Com Port Performance Difference

#16174
From: ibrahim canpunar
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 15:52
39 lines
2423 bytes
Thanks, we found the reason of the problem (They were all the same) that
caused by the electrical noise on the line.

ibrahim

"Stephan" <slaska@devarinc.com> wrote in message
news:3ed5eb7f$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Hi,
>     I can offer another area to investigate. Take a look at what your
system
> IRQs are doing. For instance, if COM1 on IRQ4, and COM2 on IRQ3,
> but also a modem or something else on IRQ3, this can cause some of your
> delay as the system sorts through which device caused the interrupt.
> This information should be available in the control panel/system.
>
>
> You _should_ expect different delays between different brands of systems
> because part of the delay is due to the BIOS and hardware, and each
> system is designed differently.
>
> Have Fun
> Stephan
>
> "ibrahim canpunar" <ibrahim.canpunar@bilten.metu.edu.tr> wrote in message
> news:3ed5bcf2@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Hi All,
> I have a W2K application that communicates on Com Ports
> if I run the application on Com1, response takes 3ms and
> Com2 performance is 18ms.
> On another W2K both Com1 &Com2 performance are 10ms.
> I couldn't find what the reason.
> How would I get the same performance for all ports and PC's (e.g. 3ms)
> Thanks In Advance.
>
> ๏ฟฝbrahim Canpunar
>
>
>
>
Technical Details
Message-ID: <3ed62c01@newsgroups.borland.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!cyclone.bc.net!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!nntp-relay.ihug.net!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!newsgroups.borland.com!not-for-mail
References: <3ed5bcf2@newsgroups.borland.com> <3ed5eb7f$1@newsgroups.borland.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 10cc67,7e0d4dde54ba1d4f
X-Google-Attributes: gid10cc67,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-29 08:52:31 PST
From: "ibrahim canpunar" <ibrahim.canpunar@bilten.metu.edu.tr>
Newsgroups: borland.public.cppbuilder.nativeapi
References: <3ed5bcf2@newsgroups.borland.com> <3ed5eb7f$1@newsgroups.borland.com>
Subject: Re: Com Port Performance Difference
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 18:52:05 +0300
Lines: 41
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.122.246.175
Message-ID: <3ed62c01@newsgroups.borland.com>
X-Trace: newsgroups.borland.com 1054223361 144.122.246.175 (29 May 2003 08:49:21 -0700)
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!cyclone.bc.net!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!nntp-relay.ihug.net!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!newsgroups.borland.com!not-for-mail