disk cache for xt

[JoJo_ReloadeD]

Does anybody know of any disk caching utility to use on a xt-class computer?

It would have to use ems memory instead xms as smartdrive..

 

[Jorg]

I use ncache for that, from the Norton utilities.
But there are some here too:
http://www.eunet.bg/simtel.net/msdos/diskutil.html

 

[Chuck(G)]

I've got QRAM 1.0 from Quarterdeck. Claims to work on an XT.

 

[Anonymous Coward]

As it turns out, the disk system in my XT is so fast that disk caching software actually slows down the transfer rate.

 

[Unknown_K]

Probably because the cache on the HD is more (and faster) then what the XT provides to the software. Eary HDs had very little cache.

 

[Trixter]

Does anybody know of any disk caching utility to use on a xt-class computer?

It would have to use ems memory instead xms as smartdrive..

The very best cache I've ever used on xt-class computers is Norton Cache 2, included with Norton Utilities 8 (the last one for DOS). Filename is NCACHE2.EXE

It can cache floppy disk accesses too, but I usually leave that off. If you have a floppy-only system, the best cache I've seen for that is Lightning! (I think the filename is L.COM). Takes 35K but I remember that it was very good about lookahead (ie. when you asked for any access at all, it would read the entire track and hold onto it just in case the next access was also from that track).

If you set BUFFERS= high enough in config.sys, that performs read-ahead as well. BUFFERS=99 would burn up nearly 50KB though.

 

[Trixter]

As it turns out, the disk system in my XT is so fast that disk caching software actually slows down the transfer rate.

I've never seen that, but I can confirm it doesn't improve the transfer rate. On my 4.77MHz 8088 with ADP50 controller, my disk read speed is 300KB/s and serial/burst transfers from cache or ramdisk aren't any faster. (because DMA from the controller is 3 cycles per byte, but the CPU reading from RAM is 4 cycles per byte)

I still run the cache for certain workloads, though, because Norton Cache is very smart about aggregating writes to the physical disk from cache. Meaning, if I'm deleting 50 files in a directory, it is orders of magnitude faster with a cache loaded.

 

[chuckcmagee]

I will strongly second that vote for Norton Utilities. Best money I ever spent when do DOS based PC things. And spend I did. Think I started somewhere around NU4.5, don't remember.

 

[Terry Yager]

I'll second the second. NU is one of those 'must have' utilities suites for any DOS-based systems.

--T

 

[Mike Chambers]

sometimes i use the cache utility that comes with DR-DOS 7.03 on my XT-class machines. does a very good job and is highly configurable. it's called NWCACHE.EXE

it really helps a lot when i use my ZIP drive on it.

 

[dr.zeissler]

https://books.google.de/books?id=KU...q=disk cache programm msdos lightning&f=false

Flash was the editors-choice. Did not knew that cacheprogram before.

 

[dieymir]

There are several alternatives. If you are using XT-IDE with a modern IDE HD drive or a CF you'll get the best results using only DOS BUFFERS and no cache program at all. For old disk I got good results with CACHE86 from The Aldridge Co.

https://books.google.es/books?id=3bSfCwxhFmMC&pg=PT66&lpg=PT66&dq=the+aldridge+company+cache86&source=bl&ots=NOpR4Ufn82&sig=ACfU3U3rNCxDRSw-2-6V4pH1259bqJac0A&hl=es&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqm8iQ_PTfAhWZ8uAKHSjEAUoQ6AEwA3oECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=the%20aldridge%20company%20cache86&f=false

and the EMS version used very little memory (less than 1kb).

PS You can get version 3.02 on that unmentionable site ...

 

[dr.zeissler]

I only have a 286/8Mhz (A2286 Amiga Bridgeboard) with 1MB Ram. Smartdrv need too much low-ram, lbacache does not work with 286.

 

[dr.zeissler]

CACHE86 from The Aldridge Co. sounds interesting, but I can't find it anywhere.

 

[Chuck(G)]

I believe that I have it. Do you want the image or just the files?

 

[dr.zeissler]

I think just the files. Thank you. Btw. ncache does not work with my bridgeboard (freeze).