Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!iconsys!caeco!i-core!joseph_cheek
From: joseph_cheek@i-core.UUCP (Joseph Cheek)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os9
Subject: Re: Err. 217
Message-ID: <1990Jan9.235009.14284@i-core.UUCP>
Date: 9 Jan 90 23:50:09 GMT
References: <5936@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> <1123100003@stasys>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Bitsko's Bar & Grill, Public Access, Salt Lake City, UT
Lines: 10

In article <5936@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>, pa1412@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (pa1412) writes:
>
>Yeah, re-write RBF and make the last segment table entry be a
>pointer to the next segment table block. Then cache all the blocks
>on open. Each open will have more time overhead and the new RBF
>would take more space but with fast processors speedy SCSI and megs
>of ram all problems go away.
>
 Reportedly, OS-9000 has unlimited segment-list size.  Want to move to
 OS-9000? 8-)