Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wa3wbu!john From: john@wa3wbu.UUCP (John Gayman) Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport Subject: Re: 286 serial port woes Summary: Not so here Keywords: UNIX 286, uucp Message-ID: <208@wa3wbu.UUCP> Date: 15 Jan 89 15:17:17 GMT References: <11871@netsys.COM> Distribution: na Organization: WA3WBU, Marysville,PA Lines: 40 In article <11871@netsys.COM>, len@netsys.COM (Len Rose) writes: > I am evaluating V/AT 2.4 on an 8 mhz clone 286 with 1 meg > of ram. Can't reliably sustain a uucp transfer at speeds > greater than 2400 baud. The system is extremely slow ,and > [stuff deleted] > My question is: Is V/AT really this bad,and if so, how can they > still be in business? I am sure the hardware isn't the blame since > Xenix performs "acceptably" give the fact that it's just a 286. > I can't emagine what the problem could be. I don't observe any of those characteristics here. My configuration is a CompuAdd 8 Mhz 1-wait state AT-clone, 8-port dumb Digiboard, Telebit Trailblaser Plus, Hayes SM-2400 and Microport 2.4U. (I'm using 3MB of Ram) I have no trouble sustaining two 2400 baud uucp's simultaneously and doing something else on the console. The only thing I notice is that when doing a 9600 baud News feed, obviously other serial activity will cause the modem to pause for a moment and then resume. I have also run a 9600 baud direct-wired uucp connection to my 386 machine and have no trouble. If I remember correctly when I first got V/AT, I also had only 1MB of Ram. Even running the small kernel the system was very slow and swapped to disk constantly. I think the single biggest performance boost you could simply acheive would be another 2MB of Ram. Overall, in the 2 years I've been running the V/AT system it has proved very stable (no crashes for months at a time) and met my needs. John -- John Gayman, WA3WBU | UUCP: uunet!wa3wbu!john 1869 Valley Rd. | ARPA: john@wa3wbu.uu.net Marysville, PA 17053 | Packet: WA3WBU @ AK3P