Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!hudson.lm.com!news.pop.psu.edu!psuvax1!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!umn.edu!news
From: "" <ofx@maroon.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Why is OS/2 st80 so slow?
Message-ID: <16739.ofx@maroon.tc.umn.edu>
X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_8
Sender: news@news.cis.umn.edu (Usenet News Administration)
Nntp-Posting-Host: dialup-5-130.gw.umn.edu
X-Popmail-Charset: English
Organization: University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 18:54:48 GMT
Lines: 31

Hi folks,

I would like to the call the attention of st80 (OS/2) performance gurus.

We have an st80 (VisualWorks 1.0) application that runs with very 
reasonable response times on Windows (on the pentium PC). The application 
is intensively into interactive graphics -- with frequent displays of 
images, masks, vector points, lines and areas and patterns. There is also a 
fair amount of disk i/o to read the data. We were foolish enough to buy the 
propoganda about complete portability to different platforms and brought up 
the image on the OS/2 VM a week before the delivery date.
                
        THE SYSTEM IS TRAUMATICALLY SLOWER (especially the graphics).

Can the guru please enlighten us on the following:
1. Is the st80 OS/2 VM inherently several times slower (for graphics) than 
the Windows VM (in which case we are screwed)?
2. Are there known configuration tweeks for OS/2 relating to:
   a. The Virtual Memory settings, cache size etc.
   b. Specific display drivers.
3. Are there any other other magic wands that you are aware of?


I am in the process of running the profiler on both the Windows and 
the OS/2 application, and understanding the differences. Any 
recommendations would be most helpful.

Thanks in advance.

Raju Chithambaram
voice: 612 644-6064
