Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!rutgers!att!cbnews!cbema!las
From: cbema!las@cbnews.ATT.COM (cbema!las)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: virtual 8086 in the 386
Keywords: ibm, 80386, intel, virtual, multi, multitasking
Message-ID: <9603@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 18 Sep 89 17:45:55 GMT
References: <[25138e13:1703]comp.sys.ibm.pc@vpnet.UUCP>
Reply-To: cbema!las@cbnews.ATT.COM (Larry A. Shurr,20650,cb,9a110,6148605851)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, OH (actually an AGS consultant)
Lines: 20

In article <[25138e13:1703]comp.sys.ibm.pc@vpnet.UUCP> akcs.khenry@vpnet.UUCP (Ken Henry) writes:
}This may have come up before, but I am new to this group and would like to
}get some information about the Intel 80386.  I would like to know the
}maximum number of virtual 8086's can be operated on a 80386.  My first guess
}was 4 but I was told otherwise, so I'm checking to see what you guys think.

Your question is equivalent to the question "How many separate tasks can
can be operated [sic] on a 80386?"  The answer is an indefinite number
depending on how many your operating system will handle.  I.e., the 386
processor itself does not impose a limit.  Of course, there are practical
limits set by resource availability such as memory and cpu time.  Thus,
if your O.S. is willing to manage, say, 100 virtual 8086 sessions, it can 
be done; however, the results may not be very usable.

regards, Larry
-- 
Signed: Larry A. Shurr (cbema!las@att.ATT.COM or att!cbema!las)
Clever signature, Wonderful wit, Outdo the others, Be a big hit! - Burma Shave
(With apologies to the real thing.  The above represents my views only.)
(Please note my mailing address.  Mail sent directly to cbnews doesn't make it.)