Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mtune!codas!novavax!booboo!amir From: amir@booboo.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: large file text editor Message-ID: <367@booboo.UUCP> Date: Tue, 2-Jun-87 13:37:16 EDT Article-I.D.: booboo.367 Posted: Tue Jun 2 13:37:16 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 5-Jun-87 01:56:18 EDT References: <119200008@convexs> <246@uvicctr.UUCP> <334@booboo.UUCP> <2311@tekgvs.TEK.COM> Organization: Gould CSD, Fort Lauderdale, FL Lines: 100 In article <2311@tekgvs.TEK.COM>, keithe@tekgvs.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson) writes: > [regarding the MKS vi, and later the MKS shell...] > > >Now, the new version fixes the bug with large files but is SLOW. The > >screen update is about one line a second (in scroll mode)! God knows > > [OK - what *is* "scroll mode?" - kde] Sorry for the lousy terminology. I meant using ^Y and ^E to scroll lines up and down. > > >what made them slow it down. It still has bugs that can cause the system > >to crash (and erase your file) but you are hard pressed to find them. > > > >They could have a nice product but given the state of their Korn shell > >(the thing is darn unusable -- it crashes your system every four or > >five commands!) and the vi, I hesitate to recommend this product to > >anyone. > > I cannot let this go by unchallenged. I have MKS Toolkit version 2.1 ^^^^^^^ This is for all the people that think are responding to my posting: I have used version 1.X and 2.0 of this product. MKS has not notified me of anything newer. I only learned from you folks that there is a version 2.1 (thanks!). Therefore you may not see these problems in your version. But they are definitly in version 2.0. > OK, granted I'm not using vi as a program editor - I use it to write > ms scripts, shell scripts, whatever I want to use it for. I've never > had it crash on me. And I don't find it to be slow at ALL! I'm > running it on a 286 ATClone and find it comparable to vi on our > VAX-11/785+BSD4.3 system (even when rlogin'ed over a lightly loaded > Ethernet). The 1.X version was lightning fast. You could *never* see it update the screen. The new page would simply flash on the screen. The version 2.0 however, can not keep up with the repeat rate of my AT (8 MHZ) machine. I can't comment about the VAX 785 but my Unix box at work keeps up with the repeat rate of my Televideo keyboard through Ethernet at 9600 baud. Also, I am a heavy user of vi. I routinely edit files in excess of 1500 lines and 50K bytes. Reliability of the package and the speed are of utmost importance to me. > > OK - timings, you want timings: here - the file being edited is > approximately 577kbytes (the on-line company 'phone book). > > do ~6800 > Load File replacements > VAX-11/785+BSD4.3: 12 sec 15 sec > > 8MHz 286AT Clone: 22 sec 65 sec (with lots of > disk access) Wrong test. Nobody disbuted the speed of file loading or anything else for that matter. I probably use ^E and ^Y more than any other commands in vi and can't stand the slow *screen* update. > Next test (suggested by complaint of screen scrolling speed): > Go to top of screen; hit the 'k' key 10 times: screen > finishes scrolling in 3 seconds (not 10!). > There you are. I am not sure about the repeat rate of the AT keyboard but I think it is around 10 chars/sec. Using your numbers, the editor is scrolling three times slower that the repeat rate. Therefore you have to put up with the beeps from the machine as the input buffer fills up. Haven't you ever scrolled backwards through the file using ^Y? I hate to have to stop for the machine to catch up and then press the key again specially when the older version didn't have this problem. > No, I never saw any broken clusters by running chkdsk; and > remember my test file was well over half-megabyte in size, 14467 > lines! "Shift-G" and "1 Shift-G" went from one end of the file to > the other *INSTANTANEOUSLY*. (How do they _do_ that?) The problem was only in version 1.X. Since you are running 2.1 you wouldn't run into it. But I had to put up with it for three months. Imagin running chkdsk every hour on a 30 Meg disk and fixing duplicate clusters that point to your data in other areas of the disk. > > Like I said: I _like_ the MKS Toolkit. I think you will, too, if you > give it a try. > I have given the version that I have more than a try. I have used the package for about 8 months for about 4 hours a day. I like all the tools and put up with the bugs for that reason. I just think that it would be nice for the company to let me know when and if they fix these problems so that I am not left in the dark. Is that too much to ask??? -- Amir H. Majidimehr Gould Inc, Computer Systems Division {sun,pur-ee,brl-bmd}!gould!amir