🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #15574

Optimal Cache/RamDisk Size?

#15574
From: klein
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1987 17:25
40 lines
2719 bytes
In article <1382@uwmacc.UUCP> myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Jeff Myers) writes:
>> Is there a cache size that generally works the well with all programs? I have
>> a Mac Plus, and I've been using a 96K cache, but performance doesn't seem as
>> nice as it could be...
>> Richard M. Siegel
>
>That's a good size.  I typically use a 96K cache and a 400K Ramdisk with
>system files.  The results are especially pleasing during file transfers
>and using database software.

I asked locally about optimal RamDisk sizes and got only one response.  Since
we're on this subject, and allocating memory for RamCache and RamDisk are
closely related, we might extend this discussion to RamDisks.  Up until now
I have been using no RamCache but have put the entire System Folder in a
RamDisk.  This includes printer drivers.  With the newest versions of
System and Finder, the RamDisk size gets up to around 600K, which is starting
to be just too big because applications start "swapping" too much.  One
solution I had was to make up three different versions of the RamDisk (sizes
are for 4.1/3.2 Finder/System):

	1. "Minimal" -- fewest fonts and DAs that allow most programs to at
		least work.  Includes ImageWriter driver.  Size: ~250K.
	2. "General Purpose" -- all generally useful fonts and DAs, plus one
		or two little tools and both ImageWriter and LaserWriter
		drivers.  Size: ~450K.
	3. "Word Processing" -- a huge System with all sizes of useful fonts;
		both printer drivers.  Size: ~500K.

These three RamDisks have worked very well.  I find I use the Minimal and
the Word Processing versions most of the time.  But with the new System/Finder
which I would like to use, I only have about 200K - 300K memory left on a
Mac Plus, which really kills performance.

The one response I got from my local query suggested putting *only* the
System and Finder on the RamDisk.  Does anyone have magic combinations of
RamDisk/RamCache that work well?
--
	Mike Klein		klein@sun.{arpa,com}
	Sun Microsystems, Inc.	{ucbvax,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!sun!klein
	Mountain View, CA
Technical Details
Message-ID: <16749@sun.uucp>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!mordor!lll-lcc!ames!oliveb!sun!gravity!klein
References: <MS.V3.18.rs4u.80020be4.lamar.sun3.2010.10@andrew.cmu.edu> <1382@uwmacc.UUCP>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!mordor!lll-lcc!ames!oliveb!sun!gravity!klein
From: klein@gravity.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Optimal Cache/RamDisk Size?
Message-ID: <16749@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 15-Apr-87 12:25:04 EST
Article-I.D.: sun.16749
Posted: Wed Apr 15 12:25:04 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 17-Apr-87 03:11:03 EST
References: <MS.V3.18.rs4u.80020be4.lamar.sun3.2010.10@andrew.cmu.edu> <1382@uwmacc.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: klein@sun.UUCP (Mike Klein)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View, CA
Lines: 40