🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BxtxD6.4CF@research.canon.oz.au> andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy  
Newman) writes:
> You want to come and use my machine? (3.0 on a 68040 cube with 32 Mb
> and an ND board with its own 32Mb) Okay it runs with reasonable
> performance when you do one thing at a time (i.e. typing this while no
> mail arives for instance) but start a couple of compiles or get some
> text scrolling in a terminal window and say bye bye to reasonable
> response and hello to the puke colo[u]red cursor!
> -- 
> Andy Newman (andy@research.canon.oz.au)

I would like to see any machine that doesn't dog out when running a couple of  
compiles-- even on a loaded machine (40+ MB w/dedicated swap-drive) with the  
memory piping flag on, the system performance goes to hell during compilation.

As far as text scrolling is concerned;  scrolling text within a set of 32-bit   
rectangles of screen space (which is what scrolling text really is-- usually  
you are only scrolling a single rectangle, though often the windowmanager is  
forced to scroll a piece of text through multiple, odd-shaped, discontiguous  
hunks of screen space) is a nasty performance hit as well... If the entire  
contents of whatever is being scrolled is cached on the ND, it shouldn't be a  
big deal.  But if the image has to be moved across the backplane (either as a  
straightforward bitmap or as a set of graphics primitives), then you get nailed  
on the lack of throughput through the backplane... which isn't terribly high.

Neither of these problems seems to be related to 3.0 as much as related to  
simply asking the computer to do some incredibly busy type stuff...
--
Bill Bumgarner <bbum@object.com> | "The devils of truth...
Objective Technologies, Inc.     |    steal the souls of the free." -- NIN
-- 
Bill Bumgarner <bbum@object.com> | "The devils of truth...