HP 75 and the PIL-Box

[Christoph Giesselink]

(01-02-2014 12:36 AM)Michael Fehlhammer Wrote:  ...
I guess the algorithm to find the next free records on the medium creates a lot of communication, resulting in almost three times as many HP IL frames being sent through the loop. I end up with an effective transfer rate of less than 20 Bytes per second. Obviously there's a lot of handshaking, welcoming, New Year's greeting and Happy Birthday wishing between the box and every single byte ... :-)
Did anyone contact J.F. Garnier on that? I'm going to write him an email.

Hello Michael,

like Sylvain demonstrated, first we have to check who's responsible for the slow transfer on your system: PIL-Box or ILPer.

Therefore a test with Emu71/Win v1.05 with ILPer v1.43 over Virtual IL will show if ILPer is working properly.

If ILPer in this configuration is slow, I think about two possibilities. 1st, I assume that you switched off the output in the Scope window by unchecking the Scope checkbox. A parallel data output of the transferred data bytes in the scope window will massively slow down the execution speed. 2nd, perhaps a virus scanner is watching the DAT/LIF file of your virtual disk. From ILPer software design, the DAT/LIF file is normally closed to allow parallel access to this file from Emu41 or Emu71/DOS. On each sector number read or write (256 bytes) the file will be opened and after accessing the sector the file will be closed again. This may trigger a virus scanner and the scanner block the file until it's checked. Or is your DAT/LIF file on an external device like a NAS? Ethernet / WLAN access produce a lot of communication overhead.

If the problem is the PIL-Box side, only J-F Ganier may help. I don't know the internals of the PIL-Box, my PIL-Box communication protocol references had been the VB version of ILPer 1.35 (for device mode) and ILCtrl 1.01 (for controller mode).

To answer an earlier question in this thread: There's no speed difference between ILPer 1.35.3 (C++ version without TCP) and ILPer 1.43 (C++ version with TCP). Both versions use more or less the same PIL-Box access code. But I don't have any information about the speed issue related to the latest VB version 1.35.