Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!swrinde!hookup!olivea!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!csusac!csus.edu!netcom.com!sehyo
From: sehyo@netcom.com (Sehyo Chang)
Subject: Re: Why is OS/2 st80 so slow?
Message-ID: <sehyoD1uJv0.I7@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <16739.ofx@maroon.tc.umn.edu>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 20:35:24 GMT
Lines: 36

ofx@maroon.tc.umn.edu wrote:
: 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.

What is your hardware and software configuration? 
I don't think OS/2 version of st80 runs slower than Windows.  In fact
I seen run Smalltalk app runs decent on oS/2.  Had you talked with ParcPlace?

-- sehyo chang

