| Title: | Digital PATHWORKS 32 |
| Moderator: | SPELNK::curless |
| Created: | Fri Nov 01 1996 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 337 |
| Total number of notes: | 1612 |
PROBLEM:
Customer said that he was dissatisfied with PATHWORKS 32 LAT. He said that
it was significantly slower than LAT with WFW 3.11. He is using
KeyTerm (KEA) over LAT on a W95 client using PW32 on a pentium 133mhz
using a DE205 card. The reason for KEA was that he needed a graphics
terminal emulator.
According to PATHWORKS 32 Information Shelf the LAT interface in
this version has changed. The LAT interface now uses the DECnet
interface, which offers higher performance and greater consistency.
With PW V5.1 on a WFW 3.11 client the graphics terminal emulator
paints the screen in 2 sec on a 486 66mz yet on a pentium 133
using pw32 LAT it takes 7 secs. They are using DE205 cards on
both systems, and each system has 16mb of RAM.
The 7 seconds was after an attempt to tune decnet. It used to take
even longer.
Had him change DE205 from 2k mode to 32k mode.
Made these NCP changes.
NCP SET EXEC FLOW CONTROL 1
NCP SET EXEC TRANSMIT PIPE QUOTA 2
NCP DEF EXEC TRANSMIT PIPE QUOTA 2
NCP SET EXEC RECEIVE PIPE QUOTA 2
NCP DEF EXEC RECEIVE PIPE QUOTA 2
I have not found anything on tuning LAT! Is there anything else
this customer can try ?
Thanks,
Johnny
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 328.1 | SPELNK::curless | Mon Jun 02 1997 12:26 | 10 | ||
LAT has NOTHING to do with DECnet, changing DECnet's flow control and pipe quote changes DECnet only, NOT LAT, TCP/IP or any other transport with the exception of CTERM, because CTERM runs OVER DECnet. LAT in PATHWORKS 32 was modified to use the IOCB interface, as well as the Terminal Access library. Jeff | |||||
| 328.2 | THOLIN::TBAKER | The Spirit of Apathy | Mon Jun 02 1997 14:51 | 22 | |
There are several things working against LAT performance.
1. Win95 or WinNT. Both are more complex than WFW 3.11. I
think you can also see this complexity by how much more memory
it requires. I may be talking out of my hat, but I think this
complexity slows things down, even if we are running in 32bit mode.
2. The code base has changed from MASM to a port of the Meridian
C code.
3. I'm not sure you should tell the customer this, but for
consistancy, we compile PATHWORKS with MSVC. When we compiled
it with WATCOM C it had about 10%-15% better performance.
4. The interface between emulators and LAT is based on polling.
CTERM changed it's interface to use callbacks. This makes LAT
seem slow in comparison.
I don't believe there is any way to tune LAT performance.
Tom
| |||||
| 328.3 | Higher Performance | VMSNET::J_DOUGLAS | Mon Jun 02 1997 18:00 | 15 | |
Thank you for your replies,
I guess the customer was just a little confused about what
"PATHWORKS 32 Information Shelf" had to say about LAT.
"The LAT interface now uses the DECnet interface, which offers
higher performance and greater consistency"
Does anyone know what area they can expect to see the higher
performance in ?
Thanks
Johnny
| |||||
| 328.4 | SPELNK::curless | Tue Jun 03 1997 11:00 | 4 | ||
Yes, an API that did not ship. Jeff | |||||