singer@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Matthew R. Singer) (07/30/87)
I've been using a PCSG Breakthru 286-8 card for about 7 months with mixed results. 1) It seems that using the MS C 4.0 compiler turns off the caching ramdomly. 2) The board seems to lock up alot. (my be due to my using it in a PC and not an XT with a full compliment of cards???) 3) I'm at a loss as what interleave to use on the hard disk. I'm using a Seagate ST225 at its default 1:3, and with this, it seems to take forever to load in each pass of the compiler. Recently, messages have been posted saying 1:4 works well with the ST-225 when used on an 8086 machine. Any suggestions for use with my 8Mhz 286 card?
michael@ddsw1.UUCP (Michael Duebner) (07/31/87)
In article <613@xn.LL.MIT.EDU>, singer@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Matthew R. Singer) writes: > > I've been using a PCSG Breakthru 286-8 card for about 7 months with > mixed results. > > 1) It seems that using the MS C 4.0 compiler turns off the > caching ramdomly. > I have experienced similar problems with disk caching softwaer and programs compiled by the clipper. After a bit of use it corupts the indicies. > 2) The board seems to lock up alot. (my be due to my using it in > a PC and not an XT with a full compliment of cards???) > Have been running several different boards in this old PC. Used to be a dual drive floopy unit with one single and one double sided drive. None seem to have caused it any problems. Maybe the card is actually defective? > 3) I'm at a loss as what interleave to use on the hard disk. I'm > using a Seagate ST225 at its default 1:3, and with this, > it seems to take forever to load in each pass of the compiler. > Any suggestions for use with my 8Mhz 286 card? Running an ST-225 on this thing with 1:4 interleave. I settled on this interleave factor after running performance benchmarks with 1:5 and 1:3. This one yielded the best results. Even using the turbo board may not call for 1:3. -- Michael Duebner UUCP : ...ihnp4!ddsw1!michael (Help is only a phone call away for members of AERA)
enchant@oliveb.UUCP (Dan Crocker) (08/04/87)
In article <613@xn.LL.MIT.EDU>, singer@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Matthew R. Singer) writes: > > Recently, messages have been posted saying 1:4 works well > with the ST-225 when used on an 8086 machine. Any suggestions > for use with my 8Mhz 286 card? From my experience, the biggest mistake that someone can make is to try to format a disk with an interleave that is too small. In this case, many revolutions are wasted waiting for target sectors. I have also discovered that, especially in dos applications, that as long as the interleave is not too small for the system speed, the interleave really doesn't make that much difference. For example, if 3:1 is too small, then changing to 4:1 or higher will solve the problem. You will probably have a hard time seeing a difference between 4:1, 5:1, 6:1 etc. My suggestion would be to try 4:1 (or even 5:1) and see if there is a drastic improvement. If not, then 3:1 is probably the best you can do. -- Here comes the supernatural anesthetist If he wants you to snuff it All he has to do is puff it He's such a fine dancer
jalal@jive.sybase.com (06/22/89)
Hi Everybody....
HELP, I am stuck with DOS 4.0 and would really appreciate any suggestions
to help out.
I have an IBM PS/2 model 80. The hard disk is formated with dos 4.0.
I am trying to use a couple of software packages (DeskView among others)
that when I attempt to load I get the message 'incorrect DOS version'.
So I've been trying to format the hard disk with DOS 3.3, but the problem
is that when I boot the pc from the floppy drive using DOS 3.3, it won't
recognize the hard disk. Any attempt to format or ACCESS drive C, I get
the message 'invalid drive specification'. Even fdisk can't read the hard
disk...
Thanks in advance....
--Jalal
Jalal Radwan Sybase, Inc.
Tech Support 6475 Christie Avenue
Tech Support Department Emeryville, CA 94608
{pyramid,pacbell,sun,mtxinu,capmkt}!sybase!jalal jalal@jive.sybase.com (06/27/89)
Thanks to all who responded to my question regarding formating a PS/2
model 80 hard disk. The reason DOS 3.3 wasn't accessing the hard disk
was becuase of the >32 meg hard disk partitions. The fix was running
DOS 4.0 fdisk in order to remove the disk partitions, than running the
DOS 3.3 fdisk in order to create new partition, than using the
format statement...
I really appreciate all those who responded....
Jalal Radwan Sybase, Inc.
Tech Support 6475 Christie Avenue
Tech Support Department Emeryville, CA 94608
{pyramid,pacbell,sun,mtxinu,capmkt}!sybase!jalal