#VD0: problems
11 messages in this thread
Well, John, I find that my asdg.vdisk.device length is 6040, much different
than yours, and I don't have the asdg-low-mem.library at all. Have you had
these versions awhile? I'm having trouble finding my original VD0: stuff;
it's been so long I don't even remember what it looks like!
Karl
– via Whap!
I've had mine for quite some time, I believe. You might try downloading
the current VD0 archive in the ASDG library over in AmigaVend. If you have
any problems let me know and I'll email you a copy. Good luck. I know I'd
feel lost if my VD0: broke 🙂
–jp–seattle–
John,
Well, I've played around with both the original asdg.vdisk.device of
6050 bytes and the newer vdisk.device uploaded a year or two ago, at 2724
bytes, and neither allow me to get back memory after VD0: is cleared out
(files deleted). At least according to AVAIL. (Also, Directory Opus never
does seem to find 2M of my RAM, though I don't know whether it's VD0:'s or
the 32-bit RAM on the 2620).
I re-downloaded the files I found in AmigaTech (VD0FIX.ZOO and
VDISK.LZH) with no help, and there appear to be only two files in the
AmigVend area.
Time to retest assumptions. You say that if you do an Avail before
anything is put in VD0:, the report of RAM used is fairly small (if I don't
mount VD0:, I'm surprised that mine's all the way up at 1M!), and when you
put a 1M file in there, Avail's RAM used reflects this. And then when you
delete the 1M file, the original number (roughly) reappears? Mine doesn't
go back down. Stays at 2M. Frustrating. And that CleanRAMDisk program
Joergen recommended doesn't do anything that Avail can see.
Strange,
Karl
– via Whap!
Well, I'm glad you are retesting assumptions…. after testing here I
discovered the same thing *is* happening to me, I had just not noticed it.
Sigh….
I did AVAIL's before and after copying a file to VD0:, and again after
deleting the files. The ram is not 'freed' right after, you're correct.
But, when you copy something else to VD0:, it doesn't go *lower* either,
unless it's required to. Seems like it acts like a balloon that only
expands, but never contracts?
I tried CleanRamDisk too, with -0- results.
Interesting, cause the README with VD0: says that it will free up ram,
'automatically, every so often.' 🙂 Maybe we aren't waiting long enough
for it to free ram?
I also rebooted into 1.3, and my VD0: was behaving the same way (ie. not
freeing memory) there too. Hmmmm…. I would have sworn that it *did* free
memory.
I'm going to ask Perry over in the ASDG forum about this. Doubt that he'll
be in a position to 'fix' anything, since it is currently pretty much
unsupported, I think. Still, maybe he can shed some light.
Sorry for doubting you in the first place. Maybe I just wanted to to work
SOOO bad that I didn't notice it? Rats.
–jp–seattle–
John,
Welcome to the Land of the Confused (and frustrated).
I'm glad it wasn't something stupid I was doing (unless we both are!),
and that you can duplicate the results: "like a balloon that expands but
never contracts". Exactly.
I'm not able to go back to 1.3 like you. Oops! Wait a minute!! <forgot I
had a 1.3 1000 setup next to me> The 1000's VD0: under 1.3 works the way I
remember my 2000 setup working for years (the way we thought it would). But
the filesize on the asdg.vdisk.device is 6040, and is the one I had been
using until I saw an upload stating that a new device called vdisk.device
of 2724 bytes was to be used after a 2.04 upgrade. I noticed that you
renamed this to asdg.vdisk.device but as long as your mountlist agrees,
it's probably irrelevent.
I'm beginning to think that the problem is a combination of 2.04 and
this newer vdisk, though I don't have any better luck with the older,
6040-byte, one. I also think, that like you, it started doing this as soon
as I installed 2.04, but I wasn't looking carefully at memory useage (until
I was checking the amount of ADPro's initial gobble).
What's left, though, is your assertion that it doesn't behave on your
1.3 version either – I can't repeat that. [I just tried the 2724 file on
the 1.3 1000, and it works OK too.]
Unless there's still something in my system I haven't isolated, it must
be an effect of 2.04. I wish the doc file with the 2724-vdisk archive had a
signature; it claims that it fixes 2.04 compatibility problems. But I think
there's one or two left.
On the one hand, I'm desperate to get my VD0: back. I use it constantly,
and it's clearly the best utility I've ever owned. On the other hand, I
understand Perry's dumping it to the public domain, so he doesn't have to
answer endless questions about it. At least, that's why I'D have done it!
Lemme know if you think of anything else.
Well, I asked pk over in AmigaVend, and he has no answer either. I'm
going to try my 1.3 VD0: again. Something is very weird here, to be
sure.
Hmmmm, my ASDG.VDisk.device seems to work fine on an Amiga 500 with
the 2.04 ROMs. . .it has a file size of 2724 bytes. I've just tried
copying two 800K sound samples from hard disk to vd0:. . .both
workbench and avail tell me that after running cleanramdisk, vd0:
freed up all the mem it had allocated to store the file (give or
take about 1K). . .curious!
Greg Marquez
\|//
_oo // ECHiDNA / monotreme dreams
Thanks for the additional confirmation that it's working on other 2.04
systems. Could you do one other test, please? What about if you *don't*
run CleanRamDisk? Just delete the files from VD0 and see if the memory
that it was using is *immediately* freed, or if it takes awhile. On my
system it's not giving the ram back (at least not quickly). thanks.
–jp–seattle–
John –
A funny thing happened on my way to following this thread…
I thought it would be interesting to go ahead and check my system, I
pull up my popcli and this is what I get back;
6.SYS:> avail
Type Available In-Use Maximum Largest
chip 628680 -628680 0 559616
fast 4355976 -4355976 0 3520128
total 4984656 -4984656 0 3520128
What's with the NEGATIVE numbers. Has anybody seen this before. I don't
get it and never saw in under 1.3
I'm running an A2000 with ECS Denise, 1meg Angie, 6meg memory and V2.04
roms. My VD0: is the vdisk.device which is what I switched to after going
to 2.0. I had vd0: kind-of full with alot of different stuff when that
above listing was performed. Here's what I get after running cleardisk;
Type Available In-Use Maximum Largest chip 531000 -531000
0 507648 fast 4889976 -4889976 0 3801376 total 5420976
-5420976 0 3801376
– Roy Pahnke – Casper, Wyomin'
Negative ram sizes? I've never seen such a thing, to be sure!
Very curious about VD0. I don't plan on giving it up, but sure wish I (at
least) knew what was going on. ? Weird.
–jp–seattle–