> If you can, allow the spooler subsystem to do the work.
Cheers Ray, that seems like an efficient way to do it.

> We create a 80MB sequential file (plus a few small ones) with a UV BASIC
program.
Thanks David, I'm thinking something similar but that outputing to a device
or spooler with a processing script might be the way to go for us. I'm
trying to keep the IO to a minimum if possible. At least if the spooler is
doing any it's at a lower (faster?) level than writeseq.

> why the aversion to writing the data to disk?
I don't think there's a need to write it until the data is in its final
shape. The system already has enough IO to deal with and in theory should be
able to keep the data in memory, which may or may not use disk caching, but
which should be a lighter touch on the system.
S



**********************************************************************
This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of addressed recipient(s). If you have 
received this email in error please notify the Spotless IS Support Centre (61 3 9269 
7555) immediately who will advise further action.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been scanned
for the presence of computer viruses.
**********************************************************************

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Reply via email to