🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <26342@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) writes:
>2.  Would it be more efficient to use Turbo C++ giving it all the XMS that
>my system had, or would I actually be better off relegating it to a disk
>cache?  (ie. is TC++ better at using XMS than a caching program?)

Offhand I'd say that you want to try to balance between the two.  If
you have a write-through cache, then everytime TC++ swaps using VROOMM,
you get a disk hit.  If you instead gave that 512K or 1024K to TC++,
then it could get by without writing.  However, you still want a cache
of some size to cache header files and what not (unless you have an IDE
disk - I was told by Swan Tech support not to use the cache program
that came with my Swan 386SX since it is meant for their customers who
order non-IDE drives.  He said that IDE had a 64K cache and coupled
with the speed of the drive a cache was unnecessary).

Brendan