> On Sep 11, 2015, at 11:23 AM, Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> ... >> For efficient overlays, RT-11 with Link tends to be better. It's less >> flexible but that reduced flexibility enforces more care in overlay design, >> and the implementation is a whole lot faster. > > > True. We were running under RSTS-E and so had some more flexibility. > However, by the time we got to this overlay structure, we knew we'd done > something horribly wrong and spent several weeks slimming down the program, > reducing the number of parameters to some routines and redesigning some > code to have either simpler algorithms, or inlining some code. We slimmed > it by 30% but more importantly went from about 8 overlay depth to 3. Still > slow, but it was acceptably slow rather than insane.
The nice thing about RSTS/E is that you can use either the RT11 or the RSX tools, according to which is the best answer for what you're doing. And that gives you a choice of overlay schemes (regions with LINK, or trees with TKB). paul