Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Article #41730Re: Non-cached motherboards
From: Wm E. Davidsen Jr
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1990 20:49
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1990 20:49
20 lines
1437 bytes
1437 bytes
In article <4761@helios.ee.lbl.gov> thomas@ux3.lbl.gov (Mark Thomas) writes: | Also, some discussion concerning cached systems and multitasking | might be interesting. Saul Lubkin in the Computer Shopper has been | professing that most cached systems don't work optimally under an | intensive multitasking environment. Anyone have any comments? or info? If running four users on 2.5MB under UNIX counts as intensive, there's no problem. The results are the same with or without the cache, just a LOT slower without. I have run Xenix and V.3 on AMI, Dell, and Compaq without problems. I believe that there are some disk controllers which have problems with a cached M.B. under some conditions, but I've never seen it with WD, Adaptek, or Perstor. -- bill davidsen - sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX davidsen@sixhub.uucp ...!uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen "Getting old is bad, but it beats the hell out of the alternative" -anon
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<454@sixhub.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsenReferences:
<4761@helios.ee.lbl.gov>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen From: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Non-cached motherboards Message-ID: <454@sixhub.UUCP> Date: 5 Feb 90 20:49:09 GMT References: <4761@helios.ee.lbl.gov> Reply-To: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) Distribution: usa Organization: *IX Public Access UNIX, Schenectady NY Lines: 20