kak@hico2.UUCP (Kris A. Kugel) (06/07/91)
In article <1991Jun2.231810.7514@ingres.Ingres.COM>, rog@ingres.com (Roger Taranto) writes: > In article <1991May29.224256.24529@ceilidh.beartrack.com> > dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com (DoN Nichols) writes: > >In article <1789@hico2.UUCP> kak@hico2.westmark.com writes: > >>I suspect that a 3b1 can send faster than it can receive. > > > > That, I believe, has been the general concensus of the discussion. > > That seems to make sense. It seems to me that terminal drivers and > interrupt routines were designed to be able to send lots of data, but > receive comparatively low amounts. (How many users do you know who > can type at 19200 bps?) > > We have a microvax II . . . > With nothing else going on and just one UUCP connection > (incoming), the CPU is pegged at ~93-95% trying to handle the single > character interrupts for that uucico process. > > -Roger > {mtxinu,pacbell,amdahl,sun,hoptoad}!rtech!rog rog@ingres.com A couple of years ago, I remember seeing some kind of discussion about producing a serial board that could buffer several characters, so that there was no longer one interrupt per character. This would allow for a driver that could collect several characters at a time. Unfortunatly, I think this was in relationship to 286/386 machines, but if the interrupt handling is our preformance problem, perhaps such a thing could be added to the Mondo Combo board (How IS that coming, by the way?) Kris A. Kugel ( 908 ) 842-2707 uunet!tsdiag.ccur.com!hico2!kak (maybe) {daver,ditka,zorch}!hico2!kak internet: kak@hico2.westmark.com