Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: ancient OS history, ARM is sort of channeling the IBM 360
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2024 01:59:23 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <f997350ed65ff92cd6f9d7901fa16c3b@www.novabbs.org>
References: <s7r87j1c3u6mim0db3ccbdvknvtjr4anu3@4ax.com> <e4f7278a5ff4e0b488306ae43aac8135@www.novabbs.org> <v5nbfo$3hdrc$1@dont-email.me> <v5o6jr$37jie$1@dont-email.me> <v5pjcc$25j5$1@gal.iecc.com> <v5q6qm$5fhe$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1639571"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$RilxofvdX2wVIO1ntoS1WOddPsh2ILcxcGXGJNN60JUvdlahu09Xy
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 1976
Lines: 23

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 18:22:04 -0000 (UTC), John Levine wrote:
>
>> ... more often than not locate I/O is faster and easier.
>
> Given all the caveats and restrictions, “easier” is not how I would
> describe it.
>
> But perhaps we’re talking at cross-purposes. If Mitch did his TSS and
> PL/I
> stuff in the 1970s, while you’re talking about the 1960s, then that
> could
> explain it. By the 1970s, CPU/RAM speeds had improved to the point where
> copying records a few hundred bytes at a time between buffers was not
> the
> performance bottleneck; disk I/O was.

In particular, my PL/1 programs were not I/O bound.

>> When you touched the address, the page fault caused the I/O.
>
> There seems to be this assumption that the paging mechanism is some kind
> of clever way of doing I/O. It’s not.