I've gotten enough response on this already to post a summary. The
consensus was that while it may be a bit slower, running 2.5 on an IPC
should yield satisfactory performance. One person complained that CDE
would be a complete dog, which I can believe. Luckily, I don't plan on
running CDE so that's not a concern for me, but it may be for others.
There were a couple of other comments about technical difficulties
which you can read about below. For the most part people seemed happy
with this combination.
Thanks to the following people-
Tim Carlson <tim@santafe.edu>
catey@wren.geg.mot.com (Don Catey)
James M Mosley <jmmosley@uncc.edu>
Michael Neef <neef@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
allan@NMHG.com (Allan Warrior)
Becker, Mark <beckerm@nasd.com>
Benjamin Cline <benji@hnt.com>
Daniel J Blander<Daniel.Blander@ACSacs.Com>
tekoba@dilbert.monsanto.com (Tom E. Koballa)
pasken@thunder.slu.edu (Dr. Robert Pasken)
My original post-
I have an IPC with 32Mb of RAM that I'm considering upgrading from
SunOS 4.1.3U to Solaris 2.5.1 and I"m looking for opinions and
experiences on whether the performance will be (un)satisfactory. This is
a single user system of my own, so it does not support a lot of compute
intensive work from multiple users. Primarily, it's the performance of
interactive windowing sessions that I'm concerned with. I could
potentially max out the RAM at the IPC's limit of 48Mb, but I don't
want to do that if an IPC is just unsuitable for any 2.x version.
Thanks for any help.
<-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<*>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=->
Jim Napier jnapier@soe.ucsd.edu
Systems Administration (619)534-5212
School of Engineering
UC San Diego
"Man is nature's way of demonstrating that a little knowledge can
be dangerous."
<-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<*>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=->
>From tim@santafe.edu Mon Aug 26 09:05:51 1996
>From: Tim Carlson <tim@santafe.edu>
>X-Sender: tim@ultra01
>To: Jim Napier <jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu>
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>In-Reply-To: <9608261457.AA18741@soeadm>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>X-Lines: 14
>Status: RO
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
>Content-Length: 542
>
>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, Jim Napier wrote:
>
>> I have an IPC with 32Mb of RAM that I'm considering upgrading from
>> SunOS 4.1.3U to Solaris 2.5.1 and I"m looking for opinions and
>> experiences on whether the performance will be (un)satisfactory.
>
>Solaris 2.5 is much better than any of the older Solaris versions. I
>think you won't see much of a difference in overall performance.
>
>Tim
>
>Tim Carlson Voice: (505) 984-8800
>Systems Manager: Santa Fe Institute Fax: (505) 982-0565
>WWW: http://www.santafe.edu/~tim Email: tim@santafe.edu
>
>From catey@wren.geg.mot.com Mon Aug 26 09:17:04 1996
>From: catey@wren.geg.mot.com (Don Catey)
>To: jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
>Content-Length: 853
>X-Lines: 20
>Status: RO
>
>According to Sun, 2.5 does not have support for the IPC processor, and believe
>it or not, they're right. I tried to install it, just to be sure, but I was
>forced to stick with 2.4, which I would not recommend. It runs okay, but it
>is not nearly as quick as 4.1.x
>
>Good luck to you.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>Don Catey Internet: catey@wren.geg.mot.com
>Systems Administrator Compuserve: 103533.2772@compuserve.com
>
>--------Information Technology Solutions and Support----------
>
>Motorola, Inc. Voice: 602/675-2608
>Space & Systems Fax: 602/441-7138
> Technology Group
>8201 East McDowell Road Any views, thoughts, or opinions
>M/S H1192 expressed are my own, and are in
>Scottsdale, AZ 85257 no way those of Motorola, Inc.
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From jmmosley@uncc.edu Mon Aug 26 09:53:29 1996
>From: James M Mosley <jmmosley@uncc.edu>
>To: jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
>Content-Length: 1566
>X-Lines: 37
>Status: RO
>
>Jim,
> We have upgraded aproximately 100 ipcs from Solaris 2.3 to Solaris 2.5 and performance stayed about the same (maybe a little better.) I can't speak for 4.1.3 but 2.5 on an IPC is adequate but not dazzling. Our machines are configured with 32Mb of RAM.
>
>Mike
>
>Mike Mosley
>Systems Programmer
>UNCC
>
>
>From neef@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de Mon Aug 26 09:59:00 1996
>Return-Path: <neef@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
>Mime-Version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 3.3 v118.2)
>In-Reply-To: <9608261457.AA18741@soeadm>
>X-Nextstep-Mailer: Mail 3.3 (Enhance 1.3)
>From: Michael Neef <neef@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
>To: jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu (Jim Napier)
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>Reply-To: neef@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de
>References: <9608261457.AA18741@soeadm>
>X-Lines: 10
>Status: RO
>Content-Type: text/plain
>Content-Length: 392
>
>Hi,
>
>in my experience, the performance of IPCs running with SunOS-4.1.3 and
>Solaris-2.5.1 is comparable. It is not running fast, of course, but it is
>usable under Solaris-2.5.1.
>---
>Michael Neef, Systemadministrator
>Ruhr-Universitaet Bochum, Institut fuer Neuroinformatik, ND 03/68
>D-44780 Bochum, Germany; Telefax: +49 234 7094 210
>EMail: Michael.Neef@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.DE
>
>From NMHG.com!allan@europa.com Mon Aug 26 10:10:50 1996
>From: allan@NMHG.com (Allan Warrior)
>To: jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Md5: SwJ2vkifimXrRtsv/g67YQ==
>X-Lines: 21
>Status: RO
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Length: 1309
>
>I have 5 IPCs with 48-MB running Solaris 2.5 with CDE. They run glacially slow and are almost unusable. I am going to install a Cycle5-90 in
>one of them this week. Cycle5 is a replacement mother board and CPU that
>upgrades the machine to an equivalent SPARC5-90. I installed a similar board in
>a SPARC1+ with good results. THere are five clock speeds available which cost
>between $2100 and $3500. I chose the 90-Mhz clock speed ($2400) so that I could
>use some of the original RAM in the IPC and SPARC 1+. THe little 208-MB disks
>that came with the older machines are not much good for Solaris 2.5. I have
>eight machines with these 208-MB disks and I have to export or mount all
>applications and swap space from the server. I am a little uncertain at this
>point about the philosophy of spending $3300 (includes a new disk) each to
>upgrade these older machines.
>
>Avoid using Solaris 2.5.1 for your upgrade. It has several bugs in it for older
>machines. (I had to reinstall 3 of my machines from 2.5.1 to 2.5.) Solaris 2.5.1
>did not quit cleanly after the install, but just hangs. The screenlock in CDE
>will not work. WABI from 2.5.1 does does not work correctly on an IPC.
>
>Good luck on your upgrade. It has been quite a learning experience for us.
>
>Allan Warrior
>NACCO Materials Handling Group
>
>From beckerm@nasd.com Mon Aug 26 10:28:21 1996
>From: "Becker, Mark" <beckerm@nasd.com>
>To: "'smtp: jnapier@soe.ucsd.edu'" <jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu>
>Subject: RE: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>Encoding: 41 TEXT
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0
>Content-Length: 1531
>X-Lines: 40
>Status: RO
>
>
>Jim,
>
>Based on my experience with a Sparc Classic (which, if memory serves is
>comparable in speed to the IPC), and Sol 2.1 and 2.2 a few years ago,
> you'll find solaris somewhat slower
>than sun OS, but probably acceptable with 48 MB RAM.
>Disadvantage - if you aren't a gnu fan this will mean buying Sun's compiler
>and very nice debugger and learning a new set of names for
>disks and finding that ps ain't ps!
>
>Good luck,
>
>Mark
>
>From benji@hnt.com Mon Aug 26 10:36:35 1996
>From: Benjamin Cline <benji@hnt.com>
>X-Sender: benji@columbus
>To: Jim Napier <jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu>
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>In-Reply-To: <9608261457.AA18741@soeadm>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>X-Lines: 21
>Status: RO
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
>Content-Length: 972
>
>I lack any real experience (with Solaris 2.5 on an IPC) or benchmarks,
>but given the experience I've got with SPARCstations and Solaris 2, I'd
>be inclined to think that it would be too slow for any real work.
>
> benji
>
>--
>Benjamin R. Cline Harrison & Troxell, Inc. benji@hnt.com
> Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
>
>
>From Daniel.Blander@ACSacs.Com Mon Aug 26 10:55:58 1996
>From: "Daniel J Blander - Sr. Systems Engineer for ACS" <Daniel.Blander@ACSacs.Com>
>X-Sender: phaedrus@ferrari
>To: Jim Napier <jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu>
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>In-Reply-To: <9608261457.AA18741@soeadm>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>X-Lines: 48
>Status: RO
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
>Content-Length: 1988
>
>
>I'm doing exactly that with my IPC at home. Window startup is
>slow (with things like Netscape) - but once things have started
>the performance is satisfactory. Its not an Ultra but it will
>do....no real degredation or hickups.....
>
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Daniel Blander =8^)
> Sr. Systems Engineer Applied Computer Solutions
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Phone: (714) 842.7800 Fax: (714) 842.8299
> Email: Daniel.Blander@acsacs.com
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> The Official Applied Computer Solutions Home Page
> and Tech Tip of the Week:
> http://www.acsacs.com
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>From tekoba@dilbert.monsanto.com Mon Aug 26 11:29:50 1996
>From: tekoba@dilbert.monsanto.com (Tom E. Koballa)
>To: jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Md5: sQa0+yGuHR+4w+iZolwr2A==
>X-Lines: 7
>Status: RO
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Length: 207
>
>Jim,
>
>I have just upgraded an IPC from 2.4 to 2.5 with no problems at all. The
>performance is good compared to 4.1.3U. The IPC is a single user machine with
>it's own copy of OPENWIN.
>
> Tom Koballa
>
>From pasken@thunder.slu.edu Mon Aug 26 12:31:58 1996
>From: pasken@thunder.slu.edu (Dr. Robert Pasken)
>To: jnapier@soemail.ucsd.edu
>Subject: Re: Solaris 2.5 on IPC?
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Md5: Qm6ZzDmvlKaDNgt/DhX3jQ==
>X-Lines: 7
>Status: RO
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Length: 340
>
>
> I have Solaris-2.5 running on a SparcStation 1+ with 16mb of memory.
>It is used for the same sort of thing yours is used for. I also use it to do
>software development and testing of Doppler radar processing software. The
>primary limitation is the amount of memory. When I tested it with 32 mb it
>was much snappier. It's worth a try!
>RWP
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:11:08 CDT