Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekcrl!tekfdi!videovax!stever
From: stever@videovax.Tek.COM (Steven E. Rice, P.E.)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Facc mini-review
Message-ID: <4424@videovax.Tek.COM>
Date: Thu, 4-Jun-87 16:26:39 EDT
Article-I.D.: videovax.4424
Posted: Thu Jun  4 16:26:39 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 9-Jun-87 01:46:11 EDT
References: <326@esunix.UUCP> <338@rocky.STANFORD.EDU> <3204@well.UUCP>
Reply-To: stever@videovax.Tek.COM (Steven E. Rice, P.E.)
Organization: Tektronix Television Systems, Beaverton, Oregon
Lines: 25
Keywords: facc cache disk accelerator nice program
Summary: Automatic allocation and deallocation is desirable.

In article <338@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>, Tomas Rokicki
(rokicki@rocky.STANFORD.EDU) suggested that Facc should automatically use
whatever memory was available.  Perry S. Kivolowitz (perry@well.UUCP)
responded (in article <3204@well.UUCP>):

> Are we reading each other? Facc allows buffers to be added or taken away
> at will (at any time). Why  would you want to take up ALL of memory with
> disk buffers automatically? What's the beef here?

I can't be sure what Tomas had in mind, but what I would like to see is
automatic deallocation and allocation of buffers as other programs
allocate and free memory (respectively).  This way, your performance
would vary, depending on what and how much you were trying to run, but
you wouldn't be as likely to get "out of memory" aborts.
 
> Pooh.

What does a bear of very little brain have to do with Facc?  (My kids
like the program, if that helps. . .)

					Steve Rice

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
new: stever@videovax.tv.Tek.com
old: {decvax | hplabs | ihnp4 | uw-beaver | cae780}!tektronix!videovax!stever