Article View: comp.sys.next.misc
Article #3023Adding more buffers: how much more? GUI's slowness under 3.0?
From: Alex D. Nghiem
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:55
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:55
66 lines
3640 bytes
3640 bytes
In article <1992Oct9.210049.28177@eng.ufl.edu> pgriffin@uful07.phys.ufl.edu
(Paul A. Griffin) writes:
> In article <BvuzAH.9s.2@cs.cmu.edu> ddj+@cs.cmu.edu (Doug DeJulio) writes:
> >In article <1992Oct9.032553.26343@eng.ufl.edu> pgriffin@uful07.phys.ufl.edu
> >(Paul A. Griffin) writes:
> >>c. If it is a bug, is there a simple fix that an end user, or system
> >>administator can implement? Does NeXT plan on releasing the bug fix
> >>before 3.1 arrives?
> >
> >Yes, I think so. Boot with more buffers. This makes a HUGE
> >difference. Before increasing the number of buffers, my NeXTstation
> >mono (25MHz) cralwed with 3.0. Now it doesn't seem like it's slower
> >than 2.1 to me (subjective, might be because of the way I use it).
> >--
> >Doug DeJulio
> >ddj+@cmu.edu
>
> It's nice to know that there is a way of speeding up the 3.0 GUI
> by increasing the number of buffers, and baring any better solution,
> that is what I will do when my cdrom/3.0 upgrade arrives in late December.
>
> But is that the root of the problem? Namely, that the number of buffers
> initially alocated by 3.0 is less than the number alocated by 2.x?
> If so, then it's a simple bug to fix.
>
> There could be other explainations. From reading complaints on the net,
> my best guesses are that the problem arises from one of the following:
> 1. Workspace Manager might be much larger in 3.0 than 2.x, and require more
> real memory when moving windows around, etc. On my 2.1 machine
> Workspace Manager asks for about 20 mb of (mostly virtual) memory.
> 2. Workspace Manager is slower because of a new feature, like distributed
> objects.
> 3. Workspace Manager has a bug.
> 4. NeXT also has added compressed paging and/or swapping. Maybe the
> memory management is slower in 3.0 than in 2.x, due to a bug or
> the implementation of compression.
>
> I also noticed a number of people claiming that the two pre-release
> versions of 3.0 had snappier window management than the final
> public version. This makes the problem sound like a bug fix that
> in turn generated a new bug!
>
> --
> Paul A. Griffin Phone: (904)-392-5712
> Department of Physics Fax: (904)-392-0524
> University of Florida E-mail: pgriffin@uful07.phys.ufl.edu
> Gainesville, FL, 32611 (ASCII text e-mail only)
Excuse my ignorance, but can someone explain how to specify more buffers for
bootup? Additionally, how many more buffers should I specify? Obviously, I'm
not a sysadmin.
Best regards,
Alex Duong Nghiem Phone: (512) 343-1111
Pencom Software Fax: (512) 343-9650
9050 Capital of TX Hwy N. Mail: alex@pencom.com
Suite 300 Mail: co-Xist_support@pencom.com
Austin, TX 78759 Mail: co-Xist_info@pencom.com
USA
****************************
* NeXTMail gladly accepted *
****************************
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Oct13.215527.28845@pencom.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!iggy.GW.Vitalink.COM!cs.widener.edu!eff!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!natinst.com!news.dell.com!uudell!pensoft!usenetReferences:
<1992Oct9.210049.28177@eng.ufl.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!iggy.GW.Vitalink.COM!cs.widener.edu!eff!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!natinst.com!news.dell.com!uudell!pensoft!usenet From: alex@laos (Alex D. Nghiem) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.misc Subject: Adding more buffers: how much more? GUI's slowness under 3.0? Message-ID: <1992Oct13.215527.28845@pencom.com> Date: 13 Oct 92 21:55:27 GMT References: <1992Oct9.210049.28177@eng.ufl.edu> Sender: usenet@pencom.com (Usenet Psuedo User) Reply-To: alex@pencom.com Organization: Pencom Software Lines: 66