Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hamblin.math.byu.edu!park.uvsc.edu!usenet
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: ISP hardware/software choices (performance comparison)
Date: 18 Jan 1996 05:23:10 GMT
Organization: Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah
Lines: 101
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <4dklfv$27e@park.uvsc.edu>
References: <4cmopu$d35@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <4cu7t0$mg5@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <4cv8j1$59k@park.uvsc.edu> <4d37d4$j0l@gremlin.backfire.mn.org> <DL29Az.Ax2@ftel.co.uk> <bryDL3r9p.2oq@netcom.com> <4da5nl$8l5@news.voicenet.com> <bryDL5wtq.4Fo@netcom.com> <4dc00a$j2f@park.uvsc.edu> <bryDL7E84.LG3@netcom.com> <4decke$6nh@park.uvsc.edu> <tmorniniDL9807.Azn@netcom.com> <4dh52u$1uk@park.uvsc.edu> <4digah$a7r@durban.vector.co.za>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hecate.artisoft.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:1898 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:2043 comp.unix.solaris:56935 comp.unix.aix:68471
gavin@durban.vector.co.za (Gavin Maltby) wrote:
]
] Terry Lambert (terry@lambert.org) wrote:
] : ] : 10) A kernel that is *never* recompiled by the customer.
]
] : Thanks. Already recanted. still leave 8 out of 10. 8-).
]
] That you even suggested this to be the case belies the fact
] that you have precious little exposure to Solaris 2.
This list of "10 items where AIX is more modern than Solaris"
was assembled very much on the spur of the moment and from
the top of my head.
You will note that I immediately recanted when Casper pointed
this out to me. My only defense is not unfamiliarity with
Solaris (up to 2.3, anyway), but the fact that I was listing
AIX attributes and so was thinking "AIX feature list".
I also gave yo this one in a previous response (yesterday):
| ] : 10) A kernel that is *never* recompiled by the customer.
| ]
| ] I think you're coomparing AIX against something other than Solaris here,
| ] unless you consider modifications to /etc/system (and maybe things in
| ] /kernel/drv etc) a recompliation.
|
| I think it's hidden (or was in the early releases). We'll count
| this one.
]Perhaps it is worth a revisit (for more than a short while).
Unfortunately, I no longer have a lot of access (except over
the net) to Solaris-running hardware.
] OK so it is SVR4 derived and it is clear you *hate* that
] (for assailable reasons, but most of them quite valid
] concerns and complaints).
I don't hate SVR4... I've hacked SVR4 kernel code since they
licensed the source, and SVR3 before that. For several years,
I did it at Novell (including FS and system call code for
Sun machines running 4.x, then 5.x).
I just know exactly where the SVR4 dirt is.
There are certain undesirable features of BSD that I will
(grudgingly, being a BSD advocate) admit. I haven't brought
up memory overcommit, for instance, because it's a failing of
almost every modern OS -- even though it is mostly correctable.
Even BSD 4.4 and its derivatives.
Since everyone has it, it's hard to use memory overcommit as
an argument for or against any OS as an ISP platform.
If you are going to advocate an OS other than *BSD* for an
ISP platform, you'll need to dig your own dirt. 8-).
] However Sun is doing a fine job of Solaris development.
I agree. It's likely that (unlike BSDI), their primary market
isn't ISPs or NSPs. NSPs usually buy dedicated iron anyway.
] Don't lump it along with UnixWare and the like just because
] they once saw a similar code base.
"It's not Camelot, but it's not Cleveland, either."
-- Kevin White, mayor of Boston
8-).
] As Casper said (and you took issue with) it is the API that
] counts and Sun can implement the "under the hood" stuff in
] whatever creative way they see fit. They're doing an excellent
] job of refining many of their algorithms.
I still take issue: I still think it's what's under the hood,
unless the ISP is going to give shell access and allow the
users to pull down (and run) programs from the net.
You might even be able to make a case for SMP if they are doing
that, especially if the programs the users run are muds/mucks/etc..
I think the typical ISP is offering PPP or SLIP access; most
of the ISP's I'm familiar with are desperately trying to get
out of the shell acount business. They'd much rather run
Livingston Portmasters (or similar hardware) for most of
their users PPP and SLIP access, and give minimal shell access
for news, mail, and maybe a small web page, but not much else.
For this use, the only reason the API ever matters is for
non-portable software (and most of that is BSD code).
Regards,
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.