DICKSON@HARTFORD.BITNET (10/10/87)
I just got my copy, and noted the following: Even with the tools in the new ROM, the system disk itself cannot load the finder without it's tools on disk. The first time I used it, it didn't recognize my ramdisk (AE GS-RAM), but it has ever since. However, when attempting to copy lots of files into the RAMdisk, I get a system error, and it aborts the operation. My theory (any opinions on whether this is totally stupid are welcome) is that the new copy procedure dumps lots of files into memory until a limit of 512k is reached, then they are dumped onto the target disk. Since the RAMdisk is set for 1 meg, and I only have a total of 1.25 meg in the machine, once the files being copied pass 256k in the copy buffer (or whatever it is) they start interfering with the RAMdisk itself, as the machine tries to use the same memory for two things at once. Thus I'm going to try dropping the RAMdisk maximum to .75 meg, leaving 512k dedicated to whatever else the machine wants to use it for. If this sounds completely useless and wrong, please tell me. I'll let you all know whether it works or not. I rather like it. I guess that's it. Bill Dickson.
delaney@wnre.aecl.CDN (Grant Delaney) (10/18/87)
>Bill Dickson Writes I just got my copy, and noted the following: Even with the tools in the new ROM, the system disk itself cannot load the finder without it's tools on disk. > I've also noted It can not launch basic programs on another disk either > once copied to the same disk as finder it works normally However, when attempting to copy lots of files into the RAMdisk, I get a system error, and it aborts the operation. My theory (any opinions on whether this is totally stupid are welcome) is that the new copy procedure dumps lots of files into memory until a limit of 512k is reached, then they are dumped onto the target disk. Since the RAMdisk is set for 1 meg, and I only have a total of 1.25 meg in the machine, once the files being copied pass 256k in the copy buffer (or whatever it is) they start interfering with the RAMdisk itself, as the machine tries to use the same memory for two things at once. Thus I'm going to try dropping the RAMdisk maximum to .75 meg, leaving 512k dedicated to whatever else the machine wants to use it for. If this sounds completely useless and wrong, please tell me. I'll let you all know whether it works or not. > I tied this with and with out a minimum set and noted the following > with out min set the copy aborted each time a look at the memory usage showed > that 0 blocks were allocated to ram disk and about half the available > memory (1024K) in my case had been used up. As well the counter showing the > number of files remaining did not count down. > With a minimum set sufficient to hold the disk I wanted to copy and a max set > to the same or larger The copy completed successfully with essentially all > memory used according to NDA Memory Peeker. Looks like Bills has hit the > nail on the head and APPLE needs to alter Finder's copy to ensure that the > memory used to copy does not exceed the difference between the Max memory and > the size of disk to be copied Grant