Need Recommendations On 386/486 UNIX systems
Larry Snyder
larry at nstar.rn.com
Sun Dec 23 08:25:01 AEST 1990
cpcahil at virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes:
>In article <2710 at sixhub.UUCP> davidsen at sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>> I would go with Xenix. It's not remotely state of the art, but it is
>>well tested and very reliable. I'm painfully aware that more modern
>>systems, and most versions of V.3.2, are not quite as reliable. It
>>supports multiport serial very well, it supports TCP if you don't need
>>NFS, and is generally a good solution to your particular problem.
>I have found System V R3.2.2 (ie latest releases from the respective
>vendors) to be very reliable. The only panic's we have had in the past
>year have been due to memory problems. The only reboots we have had to
>do have been because of a hung archive tape drive (that's archive's problem
>not the OS). We bang the hell out of our system and have had it up for
>months at a time with no problems.
I agree with Conor - I can't image anyone with the hardware resources
these days wanting to go with Xenix. If he has 10 grand (I believe
that was the amount) to work with - he could put together a screamer
Unix based system with FAST SCSI drives. The Xenix file system is
so very slow - and the chance that continued development for third
party applications is grim.
>>| 3. disk controller? Adaptec 1740?
>>
>> Garder variety ESDI. Use two drives to improve performance. I will
>Two drives does not get you that much performance improvement on ESDI. However
>it does get you much more with a SCSI system. I would recommend SCSI (perhaps
>adaptec 1542, or bustek equivalent) especially if the OS you choose is
>ISC (because ISC has highly optimized SCSI performance).
Again, I agree with Conor - a pair of SCSI drives that support SYNC transfers
will scream past all the ESDI systems I've seen (including the 15m variety)..
>The additional benefit of SCSI is that the tape drive can use the same
>controller (thereby saving costs of the controller and saving precious
>slots and interrupts).
Plus - DAT and optics - and lots of devices without the need to add another
controller..
>>| 4. 16 port serial card?
>>
>> Two 8's. You might find performance a hair better one way or the
>>other, but redundancy says use two, and there's no drawback I can see.
>>*Smart* cards, please.
>I would recommend a single card. (Slots are precious commodities, don't
>waste them). The card I like best (and of course this is just personal
>opinion) is the Megaport-24.
I don't have enough experience with this to comment..
--
Larry Snyder, Northern Star Communications, Notre Dame, IN USA
{larry at nstar.rn.com, uunet!nstar!larry, larry%nstar at iuvax.cs.indiana.edu}
backbone usenet newsfeeds available
Public Access Unix Site (219) 289-0282 (5 high speed lines)
More information about the Comp.unix.sysv386
mailing list