[comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc] Sample CONFIG.SYS file for DOS 5.0, QEMM 5.1x and 4DOS

reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim Reisert) (06/14/91)

After numerous requests, here is a copy of my CONFIG.SYS.  It resulted in
639K free at the DOS prompt, and 577K windows in DESQview.  Improvements are
welcome.  I don't run Windows, only DESQview.

BUFFERS=4
FCBS=1
FILES=20
STACKS=0,0
DOS=HIGH
DEVICE=C:\qemm\qemm386.sys RAM NOSORT I=F000-F7FF FRAME=E800
DEVICE=C:\qemm\loadhi.sys /r:3 C:\hyperdsk\hyperdkx.exe HS C:2048:512 T:1
DEVICE=C:\qemm\loadhi.sys /r:1 C:\system\driver.sys /d:00 /f:00
DEVICE=C:\qemm\loadhi.sys /r:1 C:\system\driver.sys /d:01 /f:02
DEVICE=C:\qemm\loadhi.sys /r:1 C:\utilitys\nnansi.sys
SHELL=C:\4DOS.COM /e:512U /a:320 /h:2048 /u /p

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

"The opinions expressed here in no way represent the views of Digital
 Equipment Corporation."

James J. Reisert                Internet:  reisert@mast.enet.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corp.         UUCP:      ...decwrl!mast.enet!reisert
146 Main Street			Voice:     508-493-5747
Maynard, MA  01754		FAX:       508-493-0395

nyet@nntp-server.caltech.edu (n liu) (06/14/91)

reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim Reisert) writes:

>After numerous requests, here is a copy of my CONFIG.SYS.  It resulted in
>639K free at the DOS prompt, and 577K windows in DESQview.  Improvements are
>welcome.  I don't run Windows, only DESQview.

>BUFFERS=4
>FCBS=1
>FILES=20
>STACKS=0,0
[stuff that looks real familiar deleted]

I assume that by setting the buffers,fcbs, and stack vars so small you can
save a couple of K. How low is "safe" for most uses (windows, mathematica,
etc. etc.). Do i just set 'em all real tiny and wait for an app to bitch about
not having enough? or is that inviting problems?

ralphs@seattleu.edu (Ralph Sims) (06/14/91)

nyet@nntp-server.caltech.edu (n liu) writes:

> >BUFFERS=4

> I assume that by setting the buffers,fcbs, and stack vars so small you can
> save a couple of K. How low is "safe" for most uses (windows, mathematica,
> etc. etc.). Do i just set 'em all real tiny and wait for an app to bitch abou
> not having enough? or is that inviting problems?

We had set up low DOS buffers to allow maximum efficiency in a cache.
Most of our applications use dBASE III+, which DEMANDS (it appears)
at least 8 DOS buffers.  For some strange reason, even allocating more
buffers via LOADHI didn't work.  We were plagued with scrambled databases,
which required major surgery to resuscitate.  Since setting BUFFERS=10
and sacrificing a tad in cache performance, I don't have to spend a lot
of time playing with the tape backup.

As ever, mileage may vary.

reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim Reisert) (06/14/91)

In article <1991Jun14.070037.17625@nntp-server.caltech.edu>,
	nyet@nntp-server.caltech.edu (n liu) writes...
>
>	BUFFERS=4
>	FCBS=1
>	FILES=20
>	STACKS=0,0
> 
>I assume that by setting the buffers,fcbs, and stack vars so small you can
>save a couple of K. How low is "safe" for most uses (windows, mathematica,
>etc. etc.).

Some guidelines that I use:

1.  You can set BUFFERS real low if you use some other disk caching
    software (SMARDRV, HYPERDSK, SUPERPCK, PC-CACHE, etc.).

2.  FCBS can be set to 1 unless you run a lot of old (pre-DOS 2.x) programs.

3.  Stacks 0,0 is recommended by Quarterdeck (and I think Microsoft too).

4.  I usually set FILES=8 in my CONFIG.SYS and use the QEMM FILES=30 command
    to load the other 22 into high RAM.

- Jim

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

"The opinions expressed here in no way represent the views of Digital
 Equipment Corporation."

James J. Reisert                Internet:  reisert@mast.enet.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corp.         UUCP:      ...decwrl!mast.enet!reisert
146 Main Street			Voice:     508-493-5747
Maynard, MA  01754		FAX:       508-493-0395

granoff@vaxwrk.enet.dec.com (Mark H. Granoff) (06/14/91)

In article <1991Jun14.070037.17625@nntp-server.caltech.edu>, nyet@nntp-server.caltech.edu (n liu) writes:
>reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim Reisert) writes:
>
>>After numerous requests, here is a copy of my CONFIG.SYS.  It resulted in
>>639K free at the DOS prompt, and 577K windows in DESQview.  Improvements are
>>welcome.  I don't run Windows, only DESQview.
>
>>BUFFERS=4
>>FCBS=1
>>FILES=20
>>STACKS=0,0
>[stuff that looks real familiar deleted]

[What values are good/safe values?]

According to the DOS 5 Users Guide, if I remember correctly and read it right,
its not until you have (4 or) 5 or more BUFFERs that you start chewing up "more
memory than normal" (my quotes, not MS's).  FCBS=1 seems to be an "in case I
run an old program that needs one" sort of setting.  FILES=20 is pretty
standard, and STACKS=0,0 saved me 2k, but I'm not entirely sure of the
ramifications of this STACKS setting.

What values are "good" and/or "safe" will depend on what programs you run, and
how they operate.  Personally, I don't have an FCBS line in my config.sys, my
FILES= is 20 I think, and I believe my BUFFERS are higher than 8, but I can't
remember.  (PC's at home).

My 2 cents.
--

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark H. Granoff   |    Enterprise Integration Services/Engineering VAXworks
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Equipment Corporation | Internet: granoff@vaxwrk.enet.dec.com
129 Parker Street             | Usenet  : ...!decwrl!vaxwrk.enet!granoff
PKO2-1/M21                    | AT&T    : +1 508 493 4512
Maynard, MA 01754             | FAX     : +1 508 493 2240
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions herein are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Digital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

smsmith@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith) (06/15/91)

reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim Reisert) writes:
>
>BUFFERS=4
>FCBS=1
>FILES=20
 ^^^^^^^^
>STACKS=0,0
>DOS=HIGH

I had trouble with file=20.  If I opened a DOS application, then
opened windows in standard mode (both under DV), I could no longer
open any other window because DV couldn't find any of the *-pif.dvp
files.  I had to increase my files to 25 to take care of it.

This is under DOS 4.01.  I haven't upgraded yet...

Stephen M. Smith  \  +  /
<smsmith@magnus.  \+++++/    " #*&<-[89s]*(k#$@-_=//a2$]'+=.(2_&*%>,,@
 acs.ohio-state.  \  +  /      {7%*@,..":27g)-=,#*:.#,/6&1*.4-,l@#9:-)  "
 edu>             \  +  /
 BTW, WYSInaWYG   \  +  /                              --witty.saying.ARC

chaz@chinet.chi.il.us (Charlie Kestner) (06/15/91)

  It would probably be a good idea, that when someone wants to put up
his/her CONFIG.SYS, that he/she ALSO put up AUTOEXEC.BAT - and cut
down on having to explain one's self a lot.

  BTW, setting buffers TOO few will cause things like runtime Windows
to hang the machine.  (This info is in the QEMM book, for those that
aren't aware of it.)

bbesler@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Brent H. Besler) (06/17/91)

I thought that stacks=0,0 was no longer recognized in DOS 5.0.  Am I
wrong on that?

dang@crash.cts.com (Dan Gookin) (06/18/91)

Use DOS=HIGH,UMB and then you can do away with LOADHI.SYS--use DEVICEHIGH
instead.  (And you can use LOADHIGH in AUTOEXEC.BAT as well.)

Extra savings can be gained by using QEMM's FILES.COM program and setting
FILES a little lower, say 10.  Unfortunately, the BUFFERS.COM program
doesn't work with DOS 5.0--even with Quarterdeck's update.  When it does,
you can get more memory savings.

I can report the same results from 386MAX--which has always worked with
DOS 5, even three betas ago.

dang

cy@dbase.a-t.com (Cy Shuster) (06/20/91)

In article <sZcJ41w164w@halcyon.uucp> halcyon!ralphs@seattleu.edu (Ralph Sims) writes:
>nyet@nntp-server.caltech.edu (n liu) writes:
>
>> >BUFFERS=4
>
>> I assume that by setting the buffers,fcbs, and stack vars so small you can
>> save a couple of K. How low is "safe" for most uses (windows, mathematica,
>> etc. etc.). Do i just set 'em all real tiny and wait for an app to bitch abou
>> not having enough? or is that inviting problems?
>
>We had set up low DOS buffers to allow maximum efficiency in a cache.
>Most of our applications use dBASE III+, which DEMANDS (it appears)
>at least 8 DOS buffers.  For some strange reason, even allocating more
>buffers via LOADHI didn't work.  We were plagued with scrambled databases,
>which required major surgery to resuscitate.  Since setting BUFFERS=10
>and sacrificing a tad in cache performance, I don't have to spend a lot
>of time playing with the tape backup.

III+ was written about a million years ago. dBASE IV 1.1 includes its
own cache now, and only requires a 450K footprint (compared to 516K
for dBASE IV 1.0).

--Cy--
cy@dbase.a-t.com

msschaa@cs.vu.nl (Schaap MS) (06/20/91)

In article <23463@shlump.lkg.dec.com> reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim Reisert) writes:
>After numerous requests, here is a copy of my CONFIG.SYS.  It resulted in
>639K free at the DOS prompt, and 577K windows in DESQview.  Improvements are
>welcome.  I don't run Windows, only DESQview.

Improvements are welcome? Are you thinking about 639.5K perhaps?