Howard wrote:
> Apparently, the bugs in Arachne's epppd loader have been fixed in
> V1.67, so that my hints are no longer required. :-)
Exactly, so BOOTP is going to be in a special EPPPD 0.7 version (whenever
it's ready).
> > But I wonder whether there is a substantial win in performance
> > (apart from the fact that Arachne does not crash)? On what machines
> > would it be desireable or even necessary to load Arachne high?
>
> Someone that has tested this more thoroughly may be able to provide
> an answer. I normally load epppd (epppdd in fact) high, but I never
> had a problem loading it low (with cdrom driver already loaded).
> That was several versions ago, so I'm not sure if Arachne's memory
> requirements have changed.
Diffrences:
1. EPPPD 0.7 is faster (although I really doubt anyone will notice since
the modem is still so awfully slow <g>). In theory I could make (0.8
perhaps?) a version that would make the connection faster by compressing
the datagrams.
2. More memory will allow for more memory leaks (which is good if
they aren't fixed - bad since they might not be fixed if it isn't really
required).
3. More memory will allow Arachne to use more conventional memory (atleast
temporarly).
For those who always are "in the green" (having free memory "140+" or
whatever it is) the diffrences will probably not be something that's
noticed - but with 29!!! (or whatever it is) it will help (since it would
be 90 (without a "+" ?). Increasing Arachnes stability and speed
(allowing one buffer in conventional memory IIRC).
//Bernie
http://bernie.arachne.cz/
