Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!gg2
From: gg2@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Guy Gallo)
Subject: Re: HYDK and WIN
Message-ID: <1991May31.072012.2128@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 31 May 1991 07:20:12 GMT

In article <1991May31.060613.22766@milton.u.washington.edu> klliou@milton.u.washington.edu (Kan-Lee Liou) writes:
>Is there anybody using Windows 3.0 and HyperDisk?
>Is HyperDisk really better than SmartDrive?

Whenever I test HyperDisk the system seems to get less stable.   
A man on CIS did extensive testing of the two, and his conclusion 
was that when configured similarly there is no difference.   
And that 1500Kb is the optimum size.  
 
By configured similarly he means that you do *NOT* have writes  
cached in Hyper-Disk (since SmartDRV can't cache writes). 
The speed increase in HyperDISK is almost entirely due to  
caching writes.  
Personally, in a system as prone to many hangs as Windows, I
feel that write caching is probably a bad idea anyway.
