Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:5957 comp.unix.questions:4943
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ames!rutgers!mtune!codas!killer!jfh
From: jfh@killer.UUCP (The Beach Bum)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: SUMMARY:  Unix and SI Disk Cache Processors
Message-ID: <2659@killer.UUCP>
Date: 4 Jan 88 16:09:59 GMT
References: <3100@briar.Philips.Com>
Organization: Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers
Lines: 15
Summary: A better disk cache ...


The previous poster wrote about the need for yet still more memory for
disk buffers.

I want to know what vendors are doing to use the memory my machine has
to dynamically adjust the size of the disk cache?  Why aren't all those
pages sitting on the free list being used for block buffers?

The one system I've seen which does that runs like a banshee.  What gives?

- John.
-- 
John F. Haugh II (jfh@killer)   | "There are really not many jobs that actually
HECI Exploration Co. Inc.       |  require a penis or a vagina, and all other
11910 Greenville Ave, Suite 600 |  occupations should be open to everyone."
Dallas, TX. 75243               |                - Gloria Steinem