Error - template LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER template could not be found.

Error - template STYLE-SHEET not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the STYLE-SHEET template could not be found.

Error - template SUB-TOP-BANNER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the SUB-TOP-BANNER template could not be found.
Subject:
From:
Donald Gaither-U52943 <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCSOFT - PC software discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 9 Mar 1998 13:45:57 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
Hi,
        Actually, you are both right.  Windows95 does save directly to
the disk, but some programs will use multi-threading to make a copy of
the file in memory, and then start saving it to disk.  This allows you
to return to a useful state sooner, but it can cause data loss because
it looks like it has completed saving when it really hasn't.  The
process is the same as Win95 using a print spooler to bring you back to
a useful state before it has completed printing.

Donald Gaither


> Roy Schriftman, MS, MBA wrote:
> >
> > Window 95 uses disk caching as a built-in feature. Therefore, when
> you save
> > any file the file is written to the disk cache and not to the disk
> drive.
>
>
> I don't believe that's exactly true.  The disk cache is mainly used
> by windows for storing frequently used DLLs, TMPs, and other such
> "housekeeping" files.  A USER/DATA file will probably pass through
> the cache -momentarily- but it does not stay there.
>
> When you issue a file save command within an application, the file is
> saved to the disk.  Excluding database programs... the original
> (master)
> version of a file always "lives" on the disk.  The current version
> (working copy) "lives" in RAM.
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV