[Search for users]
[Overall Top Noters]
[List of all Conferences]
[Download this site]
| Title: | DECTPU and EVE Notes Conference |
| Notice: | Use UHUH:: to access kits: see note 1735 |
| Moderator: | HNDYMN::MCCARTHY |
|
| Created: | Mon Feb 03 1986 |
| Last Modified: | Tue May 27 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 1947 |
| Total number of notes: | 9831 |
1942.0. "Why is EVE_INSERT_HERE much faster with old section file?" by RULLE::KLASSON (Sven-Olof Klasson @GOO) Fri Jan 24 1997 03:57
A customer use TPU to edit large (7Mb) Postscript files. He cuts and pastes
chunks of 15000 lines. Cut is quite fast, but paste (EVE_INSERT_HERE) takes
several minuts to complete.
It does not matter if he uses his own section file, or the standard one
that comes with VMS.
He then discovered that if he used a very old (built 1989) section file paste
was much faster. It now only takes 2-3 seconds to complete, compared to
2-3 minuts.
The old section file is built with VAXTPU 2.2, the new one with DECTPU 3.1.
The system is a VAX4700 running VMS V6.1
What could explain the big diffrence in performance when doing EVE_INSERT_HERE?
Regards,
Sven-Olof Klasson, CSC Sweden
| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1942.1 | a better editor and journaling | HNDYMN::MCCARTHY | A Quinn Martin Production | Fri Jan 24 1997 06:35 | 7 |
| One difference that I can think of is journaling - 2.2 would have been
keystroke journaling while later versions (I forget which rev) went to
buffer change journaling. Try turning off journaling and see what happens.
A similar question was posted in comp.os.vms a day or so ago.
bjm
|
| 1942.2 | Journaling | RULLE::KLASSON | Sven-Olof Klasson @GOO | Fri Jan 24 1997 09:24 | 5 |
| You're right!
Journaling is the diffrence.
Thanks,
Sven-Olof
|