svermeulen%Ins.MRC.AdhocNet.CA@UNCAEDU.BITNET (Steve Vermeulen) (06/11/88)
I am posting this question from a fellow AMUCker that was asked on our
Club BBS. The question is why would this happen, does the AmigaDOS
Copy command do some special magic that ARP's Copy does not do? The
message follows:
----------------*********--------------*********-----------------
Msg: #10844 Sec: D - Developer SIG
25-May-88 06:20 AM
Subj: ARP Copy Command (R)
From: Al Kaufmann
To: Stephen Vermeulen (X)
I know you have access to USEnet so maybe if you consider the following
important you will forward the message to the producers of ARP - C. Heath?
Every so often I copy over my most important system disks to newly
formatted disks using the command "copy df0: to df2: all" to improve the
performance of the disks. (Us peons without FFS still have to do things
like that. Actually this time my disk had a read error, thank God of
disksalv but that is besides the point.) Imagine my surprise that system
performance actually deteriorated. After the files were copied the command
"dir opt a" took 44.5 seconds, much longer than it normally takes.
After scratching my head for a while I realized the only thing changed
was that I was using the ARP copy command instead of the AmigaDOS copy.
After repeating the procedure this time using the AmigaDOS copy command the
same directory command only took 21.1 seconds.
This may not be a bug perse but certainly the ARP copy command needs
some more work. I do have the ARP Copyflags set to NC but this shouldn't
really make a difference.
AK
----------------*********--------------*********-----------------
Has anyone else experienced this?
Stephen Vermeulen.andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) (06/13/88)
In article <880610121707.02j@Ins.MRC.AdhocNet.CA> svermeulen%Ins.MRC.AdhocNet.CA@UNCAEDU.BITNET (Steve Vermeulen) writes: >disksalv but that is besides the point.) Imagine my surprise that system >performance actually deteriorated. After the files were copied the command >"dir opt a" took 44.5 seconds, much longer than it normally takes. > > After scratching my head for a while I realized the only thing changed >was that I was using the ARP copy command instead of the AmigaDOS copy. >After repeating the procedure this time using the AmigaDOS copy command the >same directory command only took 21.1 seconds. This one bothers me too; ARP library has a nice command to return all the file names in a directory. Very nice, easy to use. Unfortunately, it always returns the names in sorted order. So, the copy command, which uses this list to fetch files, and save files, is working against the hash function that AmigaDOS uses to place files on the disk. So the ARP copy will tend to frag the disk. I'm pretty sure if enough people complain, Charlie Heath will change it in the future. (Or at least make it an option) -- andy finkel {ihnp4|seismo|allegra}!cbmvax!andy Commodore-Amiga, Inc. "C combines the power of assembly language with the flexibility of assembly language." Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.