Hi...
    I heard that revectoring 0x08 (hardware clock) interrupt to speed up
system clock can cause hard-drive access problems. Is it true?

If so, what kind of problems? For example, is it data corruption or just slow read/write.

As far as I know, only floppy drives are concerned . Since timer is not counting as usual (55ms), system may have problems with delays/sync when working with floppies.

But I haven't heard about anything like this for harddrives.

Nic Tiger.

"Imran Haider" <coderunner@mac.com> wrote in message news:aihpk2$sgq$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Hi...
>     I heard that revectoring 0x08 (hardware clock) interrupt to speed up
> system clock can cause hard-drive access problems. Is it true?
>
> If so, what kind of problems? For example, is it data corruption or just slow read/write.
>
>

Imran Haider a écrit :
> 
> Hi...
>     I heard that revectoring 0x08 (hardware clock) interrupt to speed
> up
> system clock can cause hard-drive access problems. Is it true?
> 
> If so, what kind of problems? For example, is it data corruption or
> just
> slow read/write.

our program revector timer interrupt and change its frequency. 8 years customers use it everyday, all day long (machine tool). never notice special program with hard drive.

roland

Yeah, but do you also called the previous timer interrupt simulating the 55ms date time interrupt.

I think Imran is talking about revectoring without simulating the old 55ms.

"roland" <--nancyetroland@free.fr> wrote in message news:3D4DA86E.B8ED28A6@free.fr...
> Imran Haider a écrit :
> >
> > Hi...
> >     I heard that revectoring 0x08 (hardware clock) interrupt to speed
> > up
> > system clock can cause hard-drive access problems. Is it true?
> >
> > If so, what kind of problems? For example, is it data corruption or
> > just
> > slow read/write.
>
> our program revector timer interrupt and change its frequency. 8 years customers use it everyday, all day long (machine tool). never notice special program with hard drive.
>
> roland

KarL a écrit :

> Yeah, but do you also called the previous timer interrupt simulating the 55ms date time interrupt.

sometime yes, sometime no..
i think the only thing the default int 8 do is to call int 1ch and update the
dos date/time.
if you don't call it at all, file date/time stays as in the last boot
date/time.
you are right, it can be a problem.
if so, there must be a way to uptade dos date/time by hand from rtc as it is
automatically done at boot.

>
> I think Imran is talking about revectoring without simulating the old 55ms.

roland