flowers@CS.UCLA.EDU (03/19/87)
Does anyone have any comments on the following caching programs, or
know of any others (commercial, share, or public domain)? I bought
PCSG Lightning, and find it much better than a ram disk (dynamic
contents, implicitly specified, always written to physical disk also),
but am curious what else is out there. Also some friends are
interesting in caching programs too, and so I'd like to find something
in the public domain or available as shareware. Anyway, here is what
I found by scanning PC Tech Journal's Product Guide issue:
V Cache - Golden Bow Systems ($65)
Cache/Assist - Micro Design International, Inc. ($?)
D Cache - Microway, Inc. ($49)
Lightning - Personal Computer Support Group (~$80)
I find it amazing that MS-DOS does not do this itself. Caching is
such a basic technique, and in addition Lightning's relatively small
size (9K) shows that such important functionality does not cost much
(in terms of ram) to acquire.
Anything that is mailed directly to me, I will summarize and post.
Margot Flowers Flowers@CS.UCLA.ECU ...!{ucbvax|ihnp4}!ucla-cs!flowersflowers@CS.UCLA.EDU (03/20/87)
In article <5133@shemp.ucla-cs.UCLA.EDU> flowers@CS.UCLA.EDU (Margot Flowers) writes: >Does anyone have any comments on the following caching programs, or >know of any others ... > > V Cache - Golden Bow Systems ($65) > Cache/Assist - Micro Design International, Inc. ($?) > D Cache - Microway, Inc. ($49) > Lightning - Personal Computer Support Group (~$80) > I found a few more advertised in the current issue of PC Mag (V6#7): PolyBoost - Polytron Corp ($79) QuickCache - Micro Systems Developers ($49) DiskCache - Datamorphics ($49) QuickCache - P.R. Glassel & Assoc ($49) Margot Flowers Flowers@CS.UCLA.ECU ...!{ucbvax|ihnp4}!ucla-cs!flowers
dennis@se-sd.UUCP (03/20/87)
>>Does anyone have any comments on the following caching programs, or >>know of any others ... >> >> V Cache - Golden Bow Systems ($65) >> Cache/Assist - Micro Design International, Inc. ($?) >> D Cache - Microway, Inc. ($49) >> Lightning - Personal Computer Support Group (~$80) >> > >I found a few more advertised in the current issue of PC Mag (V6#7): > > PolyBoost - Polytron Corp ($79) > QuickCache - Micro Systems Developers ($49) > DiskCache - Datamorphics ($49) > QuickCache - P.R. Glassel & Assoc ($49) As a FORMER user of PolyBoost, I can say I had nothing but bad luck with it. I very quickly lost faith in it when it kept garfing up the disk sectors it was keeping in memory. Note that it never messed up my hard disk, just the sectors it was keeping in memory. I think the longest I ever had it up was an hour before it screwed up what it had in memory or my system hung! I called PolyTron and talked to a technical person. I was told the version I had was an old one. They sent me a newer version that didn't seem to work any better. I called them back again, this time wanting my money back. I got a return authorization number from them and returned it. After a month and no refund, I called them again. After much searching, they said that I would have to get a refund from the store where I purchased it. They didn't bother to tell me that when they gave me the return authorization number. They said they were going to send it back to the store I bought it from with a letter explaining the situation. That was 2 weeks ago. As of yet, the store has not seen it. Dennis Foster UUCP: ...!seismo!scubed!ncr-sd!se-sd!dennis
jpn@teddy.UUCP (03/23/87)
>Does anyone have any comments on the following caching programs > ... > >I find it amazing that MS-DOS does not do this itself. Caching is >such a basic technique, and in addition Lightning's relatively small >size (9K) shows that such important functionality does not cost much >(in terms of ram) to acquire. MS-DOS DOES implement a crude form of caching. When you put a line "BUFFERS=32" in your config.sys file, you are telling MSDOS to cache up to 32 disk buffers. In fact, most cache programs indicate that you should turn OFF MSDOS caching (buffering) for maximum efficiency - you dont want to buffer twice! Unfortunately, MSDOS's caching is implemented rather inefficiently, and gives you very little control over the cache. These two things are what most cache programs provide (as well as the ability to use LOTS of memory and/or expanded/extended memory).