From: Dr Adrian Wrigley <amtw@linuxchip.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Problems with large records (GNAT) [continued]
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 02:15:22 +0000
Date: 2001-03-07T02:15:22+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3AA599BA.868AF738@linuxchip.demon.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3A9CD67C.9B15C417@linuxchip.demon.co.uk
I've just noticed...
If I add the line "pragma Shared_Passive;" to my package, then objects
declared in the package turn up on the local file system!
This gives the persistent storage feature I wanted, since the
values of the data are retained between program invocations.
It doesn't solve the colocation of record elements problem.
Unfortunately, the performance is worse than abyssmal (GNAT/GLADE/Intel etc.),
and it can only write 300 bytes/sec (1GHz Athlon)!
Another 100_000x in speed, and it would *almost* be a solution.
Does anyone else use "Shared_Passive" for persistent storage?
--
Adrian Wrigley
prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-07 2:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-28 10:44 Problems with large records (GNAT) [continued] Dr Adrian Wrigley
2001-02-28 3:13 ` Robert A Duff
2001-02-28 12:09 ` Dr Adrian Wrigley
2001-02-28 9:51 ` Florian Weimer
2001-02-28 18:35 ` Laurent Guerby
2001-03-01 8:17 ` Dr Adrian Wrigley
2001-03-01 1:58 ` Robert A Duff
2001-03-01 22:18 ` Dr Adrian Wrigley
2001-03-01 17:02 ` Robert A Duff
2001-03-01 7:00 ` tmoran
2001-03-01 21:52 ` Dr Adrian Wrigley
2001-03-01 19:32 ` tmoran
2001-03-01 19:38 ` Laurent Guerby
2001-03-02 20:32 ` Randy Brukardt
2001-03-07 2:15 ` Dr Adrian Wrigley [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox