Marcel Kilgus wrote: > [email protected] wrote: > > QL-style SLAVE block buffering would in most cases not speed up, but > > slow down access to an SDHC card! Especially if the number of SLAVE > > blocks is allowed to grow until all free RAM is used - which is the > > convention. > > QPC has enforced limits to the size of the slave blocks for 15 years > or so in SMSQ/E (only the first megabyte of ram is used for slaving). > And I don't actually remember it, but if the version history doesn't > lie I implemented the same change for Qx0 back then, too.
The QL-SD hardware has to live on the QL, with QDOS or Minerva - I just mentioned Q40/Q60 because the effect was already visible even before the speed difference between RAM and mass storage was as small as it is today. The Qx0 suffered heavily from SLAVEing, and I remember that Tony Tebby sent a workaround after our complaints. Before that, we had to waste-allocate most unused memory, before dealing with long files. No idea when the workaround made it into a release. Peter _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List
