Thanks George for your msg about C Set++ & Swapfile, on 18
10-18-1994

GM> Does C Set++ use the system swapfile or does it use it's own
GM> swapfile?  My guess is system, however I have some doubts
GM> about that.  I once got a message, while trying to compile a
GM> small C++ program, that stated the process could not continue
GM> because it could not open some ????????.wrk file in
GM> x:\ibmcpp\tmp. Well \tmp did not exist, once created everything
GM> went fine. 

The compiler, and many of the other dev tools create temporary
files in the TMP directory. However I think that the compiler
would tend to hit the swapper as well if you were doing a very
large compile. The TMP directory definitely does NOT get any huge
usage during compilers because you can (and I have in the past)
set the TMP directory to point at a RAM drive. I would only have a
4 meg drive and I never had any problems with it overflowing. I
don't do it now though because I found that other problems such as
programs that attempt to open temp files there but use long file
names for them. RAM drives are always FAT formatted so these would
fail. Also, the resource compiler seems to be bad at leaving
stranded files in the TMP directory when it is interrupted.

I GM> The reason I ask is because I have a separate 23MB partition
GM> set aside for the OS/2 swapfile. If C Set++ uses the system
GM> swapfile and if I should ever get to the point of writing a
GM> large C++ program I might have to scramble and reconfigure.
GM> 

I think you should go ahead and do it anyway, because 23MB is
probably not good enough in the long term. Personally I have never
had my machine ever hit the swap file (I have 32 meg) even under
pretty darn large compilations but, if it did, I would not want to
worry about whether my swap file would fill up and cause a system
crash. You should either make the swap partition larger or just
point your swap file onto a regular partition. I don't really see
any big advantage to having the swap file on a different partition
(unless that partition was on a drive that was only for the swap
file.) There is only one set of read/write heads on the drive (I
guess), so they would have to work just as hard even if the
swapfile was on a different partition. If a separate drive was
used, then you could have overlapping access to the drives in use
and the swap disk. But a disk small enough to justify using just
for swapping, would never have the kind of access speeds that
would make up for the overlapping access probably.

So just get rid of the separate partition and put the swapper on
a regular partition of your fastest drive. That way you would not
have to worry about the swapping situation because it would have
plenty of room if it needed it.

___
 X KWQ/2 1.2b X This tagline stolen by KWQ Mail/2.

--- Maximus/2 2.01wb