Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!dino!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!kent
From: kent@swrinde.nde.swri.edu (Kent D. Polk)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: New ParNET slow?
Message-ID: <27212@swrinde.nde.swri.edu>
Date: 13 Jul 90 20:17:41 GMT
References: <13197@mcdphx.phx.mcd.mot.com>
Reply-To: kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk)
Distribution: na
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas
Lines: 36

In article <13197@mcdphx.phx.mcd.mot.com> stan@phx.mcd.mot.com (Stan Fisher) writes:
>I just upgraded the ParNET (1.0?) I was using to the newly distributed
>version that came over binaries. (2.0?)  
>
>Has anyone noticed it being about half (or less) the speed of its 
>predecessor???

Hadn't noticed it, but ran diskperf & it was very close to 1/2 the
speed of ParNet Version 1.

>Does the new parpnet.handler do something much slower than the earlier
>parnet.handler?  For now, I'm going to go back to 1.0 ParNet.

Fixes some problems, introduced a few others. The Amiga shell can't cd
to a net: directory. Cshell4.01 can cd, but can't find anything when it
gets there.  I have to use absolute pathnames for everything but my old
friend...

  Browser!!!

(Peter: Thanks. I bet you thought everyone was going to throw away Browser when
2.0 came out. Fact is that Browser is about an order of magnitude faster in
moving files than Workbench 2.0 is. Think I'll keep it around :^)

Anyway, Browser works fine with parnet v.2.

One other interesting item:
I started up cputrap on the 2500 parnet server when diskperf was running across parnet
& got a rash of invalid memory accesses.

FAULT ADDRESS:           32
TASK NAME:               PARNET.DEVICE

Kent Polk: Southwest Research Institute (512) 522-2882
Internet : kent@swrinde.nde.swri.edu
UUCP     : $ {cs.utexas.edu, gatech!petro, sun!texsun}!swrinde!kent