home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!rutgers!njitgw.njit.edu!hertz.njit.edu!dic5340
- From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: Why disable shadow RAM?
- Message-ID: <1992Sep11.212842.13052@njitgw.njit.edu>
- Date: 11 Sep 92 21:28:42 GMT
- References: <1992Sep11.202523.10922@ornl.gov>
- Sender: news@njit.edu
- Distribution: usa
- Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
- Lines: 24
- Nntp-Posting-Host: hertz.njit.edu
-
- In article <1992Sep11.202523.10922@ornl.gov> lio@ornl.gov (MILLION D L) writes:
- >I read in the FAQ an offhand remark that one should disable shadow RAM
- >for better OS/2 performance. This was not explained, however, and I
- >am still wondering why I should do this. If the object is simply to
- >retrieve more memory for OS/2, that doesn't work in my machine--that
- >384K remains unavailable whether shadow RAM is disabled or not. If
- >there is some other reason for disabling it, I'd sure like to hear it.
-
- Nope, that's the reason. To recover the memory that shadowing wastes.
- Considering that OS/2 doesn't use the ROMs anyway (except for DOS
- sessions, and it provides its own shadowing for that), to give up
- memory to them is wasteful of precious resources.
-
- If you don't gain any memory, leave shadowing on. It probably won't
- hurt anything. I left it on on my system, since I didn't gain back
- the 128K that was used, and the boot process was much faster with
- shadowing on.
-
-
- --
- |) David Charlap "LECTURER, n. One with his hand in your pocket,
- /|_ dic5340@hertz.njit.edu his tongue in your ear, and his faith in your
- ((|,) patience."
- ~|~ --- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
-