Malcolm Hussain-Gambles, on 23 Jun, wrote:
> Just for a positive, I have a panda board my Internet connection is
> 120mbit. I do notice a difference.
The Panda is going to be faster than a Raspberry Pi.
> From my understanding and benchmarks the sd card can write at 20MB/sec
> and the fastest tc
Rob Kendrick, on 23 Jun, wrote:
[snip]
> > Overall I was not persuaded that the cache results is any meaningful
> > speed up and could even slow things up, not just on the Raspberry Pi but
> > also on the Iyonix and VRPC on a Windows 7 laptop with an SSD.
>
> Certainly on UNIX and BeOS, it seems
On 23 Jun 2014 "Chris Young"
wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:43:52 +0100, Peter Young wrote:
Thanks, Chris. I've a couple of busy days coming up, with one early
start, but I'll try to save a log after a new day's start-up, and give
some timings of the hourglass activity on the B
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 08:10:29 +0100, David Pitt wrote:
> !Cache on a RamDisc looks much more promising. This is much better, the
> improvement is clear, and the machine is not taken over as the cache is
> written.
You do realise that this is more work for the computer to do than simply
increasi
Daniel Silverstone, on 24 Jun, wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 08:10:29 +0100, David Pitt wrote:
> > !Cache on a RamDisc looks much more promising. This is much better, the
> > improvement is clear, and the machine is not taken over as the cache is
> > written.
>
> You do realise that this is mo
On 24 Jun 2014, David Pitt wrote:
[snip]
> !Cache on a RamDisc looks much more promising. This is much better,
> the improvement is clear, and the machine is not taken over as the
> cache is written.
NetSurf already has a Memory Cache. For the Disc Cache to serve any
useful purpose, it needs to
Tony Moore, on 24 Jun, wrote:
> On 24 Jun 2014, David Pitt wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > !Cache on a RamDisc looks much more promising. This is much better, the
> > improvement is clear, and the machine is not taken over as the cache is
> > written.
>
> NetSurf already has a Memory Cache. For the Di
In article , David Pitt
wrote:
> Peter Young, on 23 Jun, wrote:
> > I've been using the disc cache on RISC OS 2.19, ARMini, and I seem to
> > have found some downsides to it, and I wonder if (a) I'm doing it
> > correctly and (b) if it's worth the occasional faster opening of some
> > sites.
> >
Although this reply is to Peter it applies to all the subsequent
discussion.
Firstly, as I did memntion in my original mail this feature is new and
not tuned yet so may have adverse behaviour on some systems. Please do
not draw any conclusions about the usefulness or otherwise of this
feature from
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:20:55 +0100, Vincent Sanders wrote:
> Because the code does not moderate its write rate you have to watch
> the hourglass as it saves those files to disc. This is made much
> worse, as as I understand it from knowlageable RISC OS people, because
> disc writes are not perform
On 24 Jun 2014 Vincent Sanders wrote:
> Although this reply is to Peter it applies to all the subsequent
> discussion.
> Firstly, as I did memntion in my original mail this feature is new and
> not tuned yet so may have adverse behaviour on some systems. Please do
> not draw any conclusions abou
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 06:36:18PM +0100, Chris Young wrote:
>
> It would be interesting to see if a Raspberry Pi running the GTK
> version from SD card has the same slowness.
Assuming you were running it on one of the flavours of UNIX available
for it (Linux, NetBSD), then no.
These operating s
12 matches
Mail list logo
