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>