Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:1652 comp.sys.ibm.pc:12996
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!steinmetz!davidsen
From: davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 386 machine capacity
Message-ID: <9855@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>
Date: 9 Mar 88 13:42:35 GMT
References: <7318@oberon.USC.EDU> <296@alice.marlow.reuters.co.uk>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: General Electric CRD, Schenectady, NY
Lines: 22

In article <296@alice.marlow.reuters.co.uk> fox@alice.UUCP (Paul Fox) writes:
| [...]
| My experiences of using Xenix/386 are that it seems to perform very
| well for a single user. For multiple users, it doesnt do too badly as
| long as you dont push the machine.
| 
| The hardware I use is a Compaq/386 running at 16Mhz, with a 70MB drive
| and an Excelan Ethernet card.

  How much memory do you have? It sounds like "damned by faint praise"
to me, and I wonder if you would give us the rest of the configuration.
I have up to three users on a 16MHz 386, and can rarely tell if there is
someone else on the machine. I run 1.5MB for the system + 500k per user.
When I had less memory, the system did bog down when the third user came
on. I plan to go to about 9MB by the end of the year, assuming that
memory prices come down.

  Good points on the disk buffer size.
-- 
	bill davidsen		(wedu@ge-crd.arpa)
  {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me