[Info-vax] What would be involved in moving RMS into kernel mode ?

[Gary Sparkes]

> At best, that's only a small contribution to the numbers that Mark 
> is seeing. Also, don't forget that the E/S emulation code is new code, 
> not ported existing code. 
> 

Hence it being referred to as potentially unoptimized. First revision and 
generation code almost never has a fraction of the performance gains
that future generations will. Then there's also the fact that, well, when trying 
to write something correct, you're not worried about performance or optimization
at first - that can come later, so you do it in the cleanest 'correct' way, then get
down into what can be shortened, optimized, restructured, merged, etc.

> A percentage is a ratio and unless there's any evidence that better 
> compilers would affect the code running on one side of that ratio much 
> more than the other side, then the overall percentage should still remain 
> roughly the same even with better compilers. 

Compilers aren't magic. Rewriting functions to act specific ways can do 
a lot compilers can't. 

I just squeezed about 50 seconds of runtime off a current project by 
changing the way a specific data set is handled in an internal function - 
but outside that function everything still appears and functions exactly the 
same - including to already compiled binary code that links/calls it as the 
interfaces have not changed.

Anything, of course, that 

> I also note that VSI have not responded to Mark's question after the 
> better part of a week. That's not a good look.
> Simon. 

Not the largest company in the world, and for all we know, they may still be
analyzing the usage/functionality and reported information/reproducing it.

That is, if they've even got the spare cycles to throw at it compared to what's 
already on deck from paying customers.