China DOS Union

-- Unite DOS · Advance DOS · Grow DOS --
Union site: www.cn-dos.net　Forum site: www.cn-dos.net/forum

中国DOS联盟论坛
The time now is 2026-11-01 00:58

47,815 topics / 349,930 posts / today 0 new / 48,290 members

DOS开发编程 & 发展交流（开发室） » QDMA v3.0 - Reduce resources, increase efficiency

Floor1　johnsonlam	Posted 2006-08-15 13:34
银牌会员　Posts 497　Credits 1,410　From 九龍，香港
Sorry, busy... no time to translate http://johnson.tmfc.net/dos QDMA now offers Sector Caching with NO overlap using its /K switch, giving QDMA the speed of caching in a setup "safe" for use on almost all systems.

Floor2　Wengier	Posted 2006-08-15 23:19
系统支持　Posts 10,521　Credits 27,736
I tried it and found that the new /K parameter of QDMA 3.0 is good. Previously, when using the /C parameter, there were always file copying errors, such as the file being interrupted halfway through the copy. Now, with the /K parameter, there is no such problem.

Floor3　johnsonlam	Posted 2006-08-16 11:19
银牌会员　Posts 497　Credits 1,410　From 九龍，香港
Originally posted by Wengier at 2006-8-15 11:19 PM: I tried it and found that the new /K parameter of QDMA 3.0 is good. Previously, using the /C parameter always caused file copy errors, such as the file being interrupted halfway through copying. Now using the /K parameter, there is no such problem. I am a bit concerned. Why do you and some users have file copy errors, but I and other users (mostly in Europe and Latin America) have no errors? Is there really such a big difference in hardware among everyone? Jack has considered that users here have encountered strange errors, so he reformed overlap. I can say that no DOS driver has done sector caching. Sector caching has replaced smartdrv, Norton Cache, hyperdisk, and lbacache...

Floor4　zhangxue	Posted 2006-08-16 11:33
初级用户　Posts 82　Credits 183
Is the speed of /K a bit slower than /C?

Floor5　fastslz	Posted 2006-08-16 12:01
铂金会员　Posts 2,315　Credits 5,493　From 上海
Excluding hardware differences, is it related to Chinese directories or file names and encodings? Or differences between DOS versions? Here, it is said that most Chinese users use MS-DOS 7.1, so if one person has a problem, there will be the second, the third...

Floor6　johnsonlam	Posted 2006-08-16 14:02
银牌会员　Posts 497　Credits 1,410　From 九龍，香港
Yes, because without /D (double buffer) and /O (overlap) 64K XMS is saved and the complexity of the driver structure is reduced. As a result, it didn't slow down much. It's a trade-off of a little speed for stability. (I tested on an old Acer, "/k /l" is 0.05 seconds faster than "/c /d /f /l")

Floor7　johnsonlam	Posted 2006-08-16 14:06
银牌会员　Posts 497　Credits 1,410　From 九龍，香港
Originally posted by fastslz at 2006-8-16 12:01 PM: Excluding hardware differences, is it related to Chinese directories or file names and encoding? Or differences between DOS versions? Here, or most Chinese users use MS-DOS 7.1, so one person has a problem... There is also this possibility! Because there are many Chinese characters in China. I have played CCDOS and PDOS before. The Chinese external drivers not only take up space but may also slow down the speed (because they need to process Chinese), plus MS-DOS 7.1 is originally a bit slower than FreeDOS. However, all Q-series drivers are developed on MS-DOS, and compatibility is definitely no problem! [ Last edited by johnsonlam on 2006-8-16 at 14:08 ]