Re: Database I/O Modernization -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: Re: Database I/O Modernization
From: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:48:24 -0600
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

fcusmstf if e k disk

The file is being opened for input, which allows for blocking of the disk
reads.

The I/O server opens it for update with no blocking.

That's reason for the difference.

That make sense.

The multiple layers of procedure calls are insignificant.

Perhaps. I just haven't tested it.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.