Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP
id AA1285 ; Tue, 23 Feb 93 14:33:56 EST
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!hp9000.csc.cuhk.hk!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!warwick!pavo.csi.cam.ac.uk!camcus!pc123
From: pc123@cus.cam.ac.uk (Pete Chown)
Subject: Re: 386BSD - much slower with 16MB
In-Reply-To: gary@sci34hub.sci.com's message of Fri, 12 Feb 1993 15:54:04 GMT
Message-ID: <PC123.93Feb14143358@bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk>
Sender: news@infodev.cam.ac.uk (USENET news)
Nntp-Posting-Host: bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
References: <C2809r.6vz@rahul.net> <1993Feb12.155404.21726@sci34hub.sci.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1993 14:34:01 GMT
Lines: 19
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.
My guess is that you did the same as me. With my BIOS, you have to
set the cacheable memory range. Now the people who sold me my PC were
intelligent so instead of setting the cacheable range to the whole of
physical memory they just set it to the amount of memory the PC
contained when I bought it. The result was that when I added an extra
4M, the machine contained 8M of cacheable memory and 4M of uncacheable
memory, and got rather slow.
I imagine that if you have a look through your BIOS setup screen you
will most likely find something like this.
--
---------------------------------------------+ "A tight hat can be stretched.
Pete Chown, pc123@phx.cam.ac.uk (Internet) | First damp the head with steam
pc123@uk.ac.cam.phx (Janet :-) -+ from a boiling kettle."