🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug10.124010.21440@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE> meyergru@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Uwe Meyer-Gruhl) writes:
>
>Honestly speaking: If someone needs more speed for perpetual access to the
>same old files over and over again (like with TeXing), a ramdisk is not
>the solution (at least for Unix users). It _is_ possible, though, to patch
>/sdmach so that it uses more than the usual 16 buffers (128 K). I have 
>configured my system to use 384 buffers (i.e. 3 MByte) and it works quite 
>well with that setting.
>

Wow! You Germans certainly know how to hack! Actually, if you're talking about
the number of buffers in the buffer cache, then 16 does seem way too low, at
least on a normal Unix system (don't know about Mach though). Would you like
to tell us what is required to increase this number? It's quite common to
access the same old files over and over again - that after all is why you
have a buffer cache.

Most commercial Unix systems provide the object modules and configuration
files that allow you to relink the kernel and vary things like the number
of buffers. This lets you tune the system to suit your machine configuration
(eg RAM size) and the uses you put it to. Why don't NeXT let you do this?
(Actually it seems to tie in with a general policy of not allowing the
owners to customize the system they've bought).

Dave Griffiths