CompuServe Thread

LAYERS & MEMORY

9 messages in this thread
#22082From: Kevin ReardonApr 21, 1988 1:29 PM
LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=(none), resolved parent_id points to #(none)
I work in the facility department here at Intel and we use the AEC packages. I have been given information that you all there are going to develop a Planning AEC package. I would like to tell you of a problem we are having with the present packages. It has to do with the layering of the packages. Most of our engineers take existing entities and differentiates them with new or removed entities. With the restriction of the LISP files this becomes more work than starting from scratch. As a solution I believe it is possible to use a different nomenclature for the layers. This would conform to established standards and that system was pointed out in the CADalyst article "Escape from the Labyrinth" by Robert Hartman of the Hawaii A.I.A. (v5#2). In the article the layering follows the CSI standard for layering. From a programming standpoint numerics ar easier to manipulate and combined with user modified LISP files that are no more than associated lists, the AEC LISP files could still provide what they at present do so well and allow user modification, provide a standard that will transport between packages, and by using layering labeling in extract files provide the standard ordering coding be built in. The second question I have has to do with the memory allocasion that AutoCAD does when one SHELL's out. My system is a 386 based one with an Intel above board giving me 3Meg, we have another identicle system that has a MEM20 board and QEMM driver (mine has no driver as it is all extended). On my system I can get 400K SHELLed out while on the other I'm lucky to get 170K and it has 4Meg of extended. I later configured it to have 2Meg of extended and managed to squeze 175K SHELLed. How does AutoCAD deal with this SHELLing? In order to make these computers real Workstations we need more SHELL memory. Any suggestions? Answers? Godsends? Thanks, — Kevin
#22130From: Jamie Clay [Adesk]Apr 22, 1988 2:55 PM
#22082-#LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22082, resolved parent_id points to #22082
I think the first question was more if a wish. I will pass that part along to the Product Managers. As for the second question, you were on the right track, one thing that can effect the amount of shell you can perform is the available system memory and what it is doing. But more likely it is some TSR that may be effecting what AutoCAD sees as available memory. You say both of these machines are identical? System for system? Are you using an ADI on either/both? On test I conducted with a Compaq 386/20, EGA, MicroSoft Mouse, I was able to get shells of 300k even under the lowest of memory conditions. If you are not sure what is getting loaded into your system memory, stop by the IBMHW forum. There are plenty of memory mapping utilities that may help in finding the difference between the machines. Jamie
#22140From: Richard HenleyApr 22, 1988 6:59 PM
#22130-LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22130, resolved parent_id points to #22130
Jamie, I've been doing some system re-arranging to find the REAL bugs with my Verticom Twin Focus, and it appears that the SHELL command is affected by the ACADFREERAM setting…..ie more freeram….more shell space available…… Y/N>: ?
#22201From: Jamie Clay [Adesk]Apr 25, 1988 3:35 PM
#22140-#LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22140, resolved parent_id points to #22140
That is an interesting observation, but I am not sure that it is true. The things that are known to effect the shell space are TSR programs (ADIs, Sidekick, CEMM), disk space, graphic cards (like EGA) and available system memory. What kind of results are you getting and what system it this? Jamie
#22263From: Richard HenleyApr 26, 1988 1:35 PM
#22201-#LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22201, resolved parent_id points to #22201
Jamie, In speaking to the Verticom tech I was told to use ACADFREERAM at 12, and to make my LISPSTACK >20000 in an attempt to solve some problems I have been experiencing with the Twin Focus setup……..so I noticed that my shells to PCTOOLS did'nt have enough memory released to operate properly (I had it set at 200k in the PGP file…. a real minimum for the latest release)…….(now at 210k, and appears to be working)……… and some other shells did'nt have enough space to operate either….. 286 AT compat system w/Intel Above Board 4mb (device = emm.sys m5 i5 d), Buffers=20, Files=20, Shell /e:360, MSDOS 3.1, Twin Focus ADI for Verticom H-16……… There does seem to be a need to drop FREERAM down, but I could only get to about 16 before I was getting out of space errors……. and sliding the STACK up to 25000 so far seems to have helped also, in solving some apparent Verticom problems……. I'm not sure what the Verticom drivers are doing to affect these areas, but there is something happening…..
#22312From: Jamie Clay [Adesk]Apr 27, 1988 4:51 PM
#22263-LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22263, resolved parent_id points to #22263
I really don't see where adjusting LISPSTACK could effect the system shell. I am not surprised that an ADI is effecting the limit of your SHELL, however we have the Twin Focus here on a 386, 2meg Vdisk get a 512k shell. It may be your EMM.SYS effecting your environment. Also – What is your CHKDSK showing for bytes free? Jamie
#22142From: Kevin ReardonApr 22, 1988 8:43 PM
#22130-#LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22130, resolved parent_id points to #22130
Yup they are identicel system for system. The only difference being one uses an AboveBoard switched to backfill the 512 to 640K while the other uses QEMM.SYS to backfill using the MEM20 board extended. No TSR's are allowed, and besides the only trouble I find with those is on initial ACAD bootup, not having enough memory for extended I/O or AutoLISP. This problem occures when the SHELL memory parameters are increased. Our Compac's can only get 200K SHELLed, what driver do you use for the extended/expanded memory? This might help. As for my first wish well… "When you wish upon a star…" —Kevin
#22147From: Training [ADESK]Apr 22, 1988 9:50 PM
#22142-LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22142, resolved parent_id points to #22142
Kevin — Isn't QEMM.SYS a TSR driver, and isn't that the machine that frees up less memory during a SHELL? In some cases, I think that both the size and the location of the TSR in conventional memory affect the amount of memory available for an AutoCAD SHELL. — Brad ..
#22202From: Jamie Clay [Adesk]Apr 25, 1988 3:36 PM
#22142-LAYERS & MEMORY — declared parent_msg_num=22142, resolved parent_id points to #22142
Kevin, are you using the QEMM.SYS to build the 640K? It is very possible that method is causing AutoCAD to think there isn't enough room for the size shell you want. Is there a way to set up the memory by switch? I would try that. Let me know your results. Jamie