From: adams@pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de (Adams) Subject: Re: Is Linux a viable OS for a stable multiuser unix system, not just a hobbiest's Unix box? Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1993 18:15:22 GMT
In article <IBE1109.93Feb9142158@etbsun1.draper.com> ibe1109@draper.com (Ira Ekhaus) writes:
Hi,
> I'm interested in setting up a Unix box for a few researchers. It
> would be doing some fairly light computing (by scientific computing
> standards).
We run SunOs-4.1.1 on a SUN3/160, sysV68R3.5 on a Motorola Delta,
sysV68R3.6.2 on a Motorola Delta and Linux-0.99.4 on two PCs.
> I'm trying to determine the tradeoffs between
> The lower cost of *86 boxes compared to sparc's.
> vs
> the delays and distractions that an unstable operating system would
> provide.
Personal view: Linux is not as stable and mature as SunOs 4.1.1, but
far better than sysV68. NIS and DNS need a beefup on Linux,
up to now we were not able to setup a NFS server on Linux, though client
works fine (servers are SUN3/160 and IBM RS/6000 ).
> As the prospective system gets bigger the relative cost of the CPU
> becomes less of an issue (peripherals costing the same on both systems
> ) and I believe the SPARC workstation wins out.
The Sparcstations tend to win, but not hands up. It is more the
God-forgive-'em ISA architecture, which makes a SPAR station preferrable.
ISA means:
-) no DMA into memory areas above 16 MByte without kernel
buffers (so called "bang buffers") and kernel bcopy.
which makes any real use of DMA absurd.
-) no busarbitration, real multi-mastering not available.
> > But for a low capital interim solution Linux might work because
> 1) the code I'd write would be unix generic
> 2) the 486 box is already there and
> 3) at the very least the 486 box would make
> a good Xterm (using linux of course).
Here in Europe, a well equipped PC (DX 486 ) is as expensive as a
comparable Sparcstation. PCs seem to be cheaper, as you pay them piece
for piece, CPU , Monitor, hard disk, secondary chache's SRAM, extra
price if fast enough (no joke), Dirty Tag ram etc. etc.
> Has anyone else considered these tradeoffs?
Sure.