TechTips: If you're running Paradox for DOS under Windows ...
Sundial Services
TECHTIP: BACKGROUND EXECUTION
If you are running Paradox for DOS under Windows 3.1, you should be aware of
the various ways that Windows can run a DOS application, and what it can mean
to you and your data.
When you switch from a DOS application (in a window or full-screen), by
default Windows will -stop running- the application. It's as if you turned
the computer off mid-session, and if you are unfortunate enough to have any
locks or pending edits or unwritten table-buffers or anything like that...
it's precisely the same (negative) effect.
Get to know the PIFEDIT utility (PIF Editor). To run DOS apps correctly you
need to create PIFs for them, and one of the controls you have there is
"background execution." This will cause the application to receive time
slices even when it is not in the foreground, and Paradox will run correctly
in that environment. (The help for PIFEDIT is quite thorough, which obviously
means Microsoft didn't write it.) ;-)
....
TECHTIP: RUNNING PARADOX FOR DOS IN >16MB:
Another important issue, as our machines finally become larger (to handle
Win95, etc), is the fact that Paradox 4.x for DOS does not support more than
16 megabytes of memory! It will fail to start. But there is a magic cookie,
subtly documented (somewhere...)
Use the command-line parameter: -extk 16384
(or however many kilobytes of extended/expanded memory you want to give to
Paradox, but in any case not more than 16M = 16,384K).
----
ABOUT SUNDIAL SERVICES:
Founded in 1992, Sundial Services furnishes unique software tools to Paradox
developers worldwide. "Say, aren't you =tired= of driving across town...?"
http://www.azwebproducts.com/computer/sundial/sundial1.htm
in...@sundialservices.com
©1996 Sundial Services
Bryan Coyle
in...@sundialservices.com (Sundial Services) wrote:
>TECHTIP: BACKGROUND EXECUTION
> http://www.azwebproducts.com/computer/sundial/sundial1.htm
> in...@sundialservices.com
>©1996 Sundial Services
Experimentation, esp w the runtime, leads me to believe that
performance is much better with a smaller extk value - either 4096 or
8192. The excessive cache thrashing that the larger value causes
seems to be independent of Win (or Win95 for that matter) swap file
and external cache settings.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Random numbers are just too important to be left to chance - Anon.
bco...@mcs.net - - - Bryan W. Coyle
Mike Perry
In article <info.4344...@sundialservices.com>,
in...@sundialservices.com says...
> TECHTIP: BACKGROUND EXECUTION
>
> If you are running Paradox for DOS under Windows 3.1, you should be aware of
> the various ways that Windows can run a DOS application, and what it can mean
> to you and your data.
>
> When you switch from a DOS application (in a window or full-screen), by
> default Windows will -stop running- the application. It's as if you turned
> the computer off mid-session, and if you are unfortunate enough to have any
> locks or pending edits or unwritten table-buffers or anything like that...
> it's precisely the same (negative) effect.
>
> Get to know the PIFEDIT utility (PIF Editor). To run DOS apps correctly you
> need to create PIFs for them, and one of the controls you have there is
> "background execution." This will cause the application to receive time
> slices even when it is not in the foreground, and Paradox will run correctly
> in that environment. (The help for PIFEDIT is quite thorough, which obviously
> means Microsoft didn't write it.) ;-)
>
> ....
> TECHTIP: RUNNING PARADOX FOR DOS IN >16MB:
>
> Another important issue, as our machines finally become larger (to handle
> Win95, etc), is the fact that Paradox 4.x for DOS does not support more than
> 16 megabytes of memory! It will fail to start. But there is a magic cookie,
> subtly documented (somewhere...)
>
> Use the command-line parameter: -extk 16384
>
<rest snipped>
Here is a question I have asked before but it is something I have noted
on my workstation. I have a 64mb NT 4.0 workstation running Pdox 4.5 for
dos. It works quite well in all regards. I installed and ran Pdox 4.5
without the command line parameter for weeks before reading some advice
in this newsgroup to add the parameter. Pdox 4.5 always started and
executed quite well without the parameter being added. I also ran Pdox
4.5 on an OS/2 Warp workstation and never added the command line and it
worked quite well too. This machine has 20 mb of ram on it presently.
I did add the command line parameter and have not noticed any changes in
execution.
Does Win95 handle memory larger than 16mb differently than say NT
workstation 4.0 or OS/2 Warp? Do Win95 users have to add the parameter
to just get a pdox for dos version to even start? Im curious because
Pdox 4.5 never objected to my 64mb of ram on the NT box or the 20mb on my
OS/2 box.
Thanks.
--
Michael Perry
mpe...@best.com
Sundial Services
>Here is a question I have asked before but it is something I have noted
>on my workstation. I have a 64mb NT 4.0 workstation running Pdox 4.5 for
>dos. It works quite well in all regards. I installed and ran Pdox 4.5
>without the command line parameter for weeks before reading some advice
>in this newsgroup to add the parameter. Pdox 4.5 always started and
>executed quite well without the parameter being added. I also ran Pdox
>4.5 on an OS/2 Warp workstation and never added the command line and it
>worked quite well too. This machine has 20 mb of ram on it presently.
>I did add the command line parameter and have not noticed any changes in
>execution.
>Does Win95 handle memory larger than 16mb differently than say NT
>workstation 4.0 or OS/2 Warp? Do Win95 users have to add the parameter
>to just get a pdox for dos version to even start? Im curious because
>Pdox 4.5 never objected to my 64mb of ram on the NT box or the 20mb on my
>OS/2 box.
There are two aspects to consider. The first is that the "-extk" problem did,
I believe, get fixed in that Paradox for DOS was later programmed to simply
ignore the extra memory. I'm not sure what version did that.
Second, in Win95, NT and OS/2 it is my understanding that the amount of memory
visible to the application can be and might well be limited such that the
application does not know how much memory is physically available but only how
much has been allocated to it, either of which solves the problem.
So basically... either you see this show-stopper or you don't, and if you do
here's how to solve it, and if Paradox doesn't complain you don't have a
problem. :->
/mr/
James Miles
>
If the satement from Sundial is correct (that the >16mb problem was
fixed), then you should not have any problem running pdox on a win95
machine with > 16mb. I would be very interested if you can do this, as I
have never heard that there was a release of Pdox DOS that corrected
this problem without the command line switch.
If you can find someone who would let you attempt installation on a
WIn95 or DOS machine you could answer the question.
Regards J Miles
Mike Perry
In article <328644...@erinet.com>, jmi...@erinet.com says...
machine that has 32mb of ram in it. I have verified that Pdox 4.5 does
not need the command line switch in NT workstation 4.0 and OS/2 Warp 3.00
with ram greater than 16mb in size. My NT 4 box has 64mb and my warp
machine (laptop) has 20mb.
Will followup here with results in a few days.
--
Michael Perry
mpe...@best.com