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:
David Gillett <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCSOFT - PC software discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 12 Feb 1998 12:27:39 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (51 lines)
On 11 Feb 98 at 20:48, Eddie Apostol wrote:

> Alright then, I just popped up sysedit in Win95 and checked my autoexec.bat
> and sure enough I see the following line:
>
> LoadHigh D:\WIN96\SMARTDRV.EXE
>
> Is loading this up a waste of memory for the system (if I am interpreting
> what you say correctly,  then loading both SmartDrive when Windows 95 loads
> up VCACHE is redundant)...should I remove this item from the autoexec file,
> or are their parameters to add after this statement?

  Yes.  VCACHE was available in Win 3.11 as a replacement for
SMARTDRV, and is always loaded automatically in Win95.  LOading
SMARTDRV just sets aside a chunk of memory that can't be part of any
of the four categories I mentioned -- take it out.

> >You can use the VCACHE settings in WIN.INI to set the maximum and minimum
> sizes for category 3.
>
> Hey...I could not find the VCACHE settings in my SYSTEM.INI file...I did
> locate it in my SYSTEM.INI file. Is that the correct location, or has it
> been in the wrong place all these years? (actually, only three, since Win
> '95 came out)

  More likely that I meant SYSTEM.INI and wrote WIN.INI.  Oops.

> Here are the settings...are there optimal values for a 64 MEG Ram system?
>
> [vcache]
> MaxFileCache=6144
> MinFileCache=1024

  For any particular period when you're using the machine, there may
be a single best setting.  I'd guess that these are probably on the
low side for a workstation (as opposed to server) under home use with
64MB of RAM; you might push the max to as much as 16384 without
hurting anything (and possibly helping).

> I am eager to set this right once and for all, so that I don't need to
> encounter that occasional GPF...

  There should not be any values for these settings that will, of
themselves, cause a GPF.

David G


          PCSOFT:  http://nospin.com  or  [log in to unmask]


ATOM RSS1 RSS2

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