🚀 go-pugleaf

bissiri@blake.acs.washington.edu writes:
| 
| Thirdly, the packing slip from the manufacturer gives the drive's specs.
| 

I'll verify this - I'm looking at mine right now.

| Note that many folks with the ROM 8 296N are quite happy with
| 2:1 interleave and about 400+k data transfer rate.  After all, most
| things coming off your drive are relatively small.  Unless you have
| disk intensive operations going all the time, you may be satisfied with
| ROM 8's.
| 

I'll also verify this. My experience is that the FAT lookup is a much bigger
bottleneck than transfer rate - even with FATSPEED. Also, when loading large
programs, I notice that quite often it takes the program 2-3 times longer to
wake up than it took to get it off disk. Increasing transfer rate 30% 
isn't going to be very helpful. My guess is that handling very large data 
files is where the transfer rate is going to get in your way - then you 
want to try something like the Quantum Kevin mentioned.

I'd also mention that a good disk cache is really the best way to speed
up some disk-intensive operations like compiles, short of putting all the
libraries, files and executables in a RAM disk, that is. I use DCACHE and
with 200-300K of cache, recompiles often only make one or two brief disk
accesses.



Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are those solely
of the author, who has no pecuniary interest in the companies mentioned.

Copyright (c) 1989 by Andrew Cassino.  All rights reserved.

    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    % Andy Cassino                                                  %
    % uucp: hplabs!hplsla!andyc  domain: andyc%hplsla@hplabs.hp.com %
    % Hewlett-Packard              Lake Stevens Instrument Division %
    % 8600 Soper Hill Road                   Everett, WA 98205-1298 %
    % (206) 335-2211                                                %
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%