*BSD News Article 10976


Return to BSD News archive

Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP
	id AA1098 ; Tue, 23 Feb 93 14:26:09 EST
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sgiblab!a2i!kent
From: kent@rahul.net (Kent Talarico)
Subject: Re: 386BSD - much slower with 16MB
Message-ID: <C293qq.M9o@rahul.net>
Sender: news@rahul.net (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: bolero
Organization: a2i network
References: <C2809r.6vz@rahul.net> <1993Feb10.171045.10564@coe.montana.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1993 21:01:37 GMT
Lines: 22

In article <1993Feb10.171045.10564@coe.montana.edu> osyjm@cs.montana.edu (Jaye Mathisen) writes:
>In article <C2809r.6vz@rahul.net> kent@rahul.net (Kent Talarico) writes:
>>I just increased my memory from 8MB to 16MB and the machine has
>>slowed down drastically.
>>
>>I timed a complete compile of /bin/sh. It took 52 seconds with 8MB
>>and 163 seconds with 16MB.
>>
>>I'm using a kernel with all the patchkit-0.2 patches installed.
>
>Somebody here was having the same problem, but under OS2.  Turns out his
>BIOS has some kind of option for setting the memory that is cacheable to
>extend to the new range.  ie, apparently, accesses outside his original
>8MB's weren't being cached by the external CPU cache.
>
>Maybe it's something like that.

That's exactly what the problem was. I set the "cacheable address range"
setting in the bios to 16MB and it's no longer slow.

-- 
Kent Talarico <kent@rahul.net>