Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.iastate.edu!skank
From: skank@iastate.edu (Skank George L)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Is cacheing or Addbuffers better??
Message-ID: <1991Jun15.083925.15551@news.iastate.edu>
Date: 15 Jun 91 08:39:25 GMT
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: na
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Lines: 20


     This is the kind of question that would go in a comp.sys.amiga.system
newsgroup if we had one I imagine.  Anyway, here goes.  Which will improve
disk speed more, using one of the several disk cacheing programs, or using
addbuffers to add extra buffers to a drive?  I have an Amiga 3000 with 4Megs
of fastram and would like to create a 1Meg diskbuffer.  Additionally, is
there a point beyond which it becomes pointless to add more buffers.  I
realize that that when the size of the buffer is squeezing resources into chip
ram, that's bad, however, is there a practical limit in software to the
size of the buffer (i.e.: too many buffers means slower access time just
because there are so many buffers)?  Anyone know?

					--George
  

-- 
George L. Skank			|Five years ago I couldn't spell engineer.  ///
Senior, Electrical Engineering	|Now I are one.				   ///
Iowa State University, Ames, IA	|				      \\\ ///
skank@iastate.edu		|Phone: (515) 233-2165		       \\X//