Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ucsd!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!hubcap!ncrcae!sauron!campbell
From: campbell@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM (Mark Campbell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ncr
Subject: Re: Tower Sys V.3 upgrade
Message-ID: <2236@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM>
Date: 21 Jul 90 14:31:47 GMT
References: <4382@texbell.sbc.com> <4383@texbell.swbt.com> <282@fdls.odag.or.gov>
Reply-To: mark.campbell@ncrcae.Columbia.NCR.COM (Mark Campbell)
Organization: E&M-Columbia, NCR Corp, W Columbia, SC
Lines: 38

In article <282@fdls.odag.or.gov> dougw@fdls.odag.or.gov (Doug Walker) writes:
>In <4383@texbell.swbt.com> news1@texbell.swbt.com (Greg Hackney) writes:
>
>	...
>
>As long as the issue has been opened, what kind of performance change (if any)
>have users experienced when they went from 02.xx to 03.xx?  I've heard
>(rumors, mind you) that additional swap space would probably be required
>(beyond the stock 10 mb under 02.xx) and that nothing is faster and some
>things are slower.  I'd be interested in your upgrade experiences; both good
>and bad.  Particularly changes in overall system performance and
>incompatabilities discovered with existing application software.

We have literally dozens of industry and proprietary benchmarks that show that
release 3.00 is faster; however, the only thing most folks care about is
whether ***their*** particular application is faster.  I'd also be very
interested in hearing about situations in which "...nothing is faster and
everything is slower..." -- we'd like to pick those situations up to use in
our testing so that it doesn't slip through the next major upgrade to an NCR
system.

You are correct about the swap space -- more is required under V.3.  This was
required to fix stress panic's and system hangs -- swap memory is accounted for
a process when that process begins and not when swap memory is actually used.
Note that this is swap memory (on the disk); not physical memory.

With respect to the question in another posting concerning minimum physical
memory required; if everthing else is equal, then you shouldn't need much
more.  One warning, however, most folks using V.3 on the 32/650 are tending
to use more and more system and application packages -- this can cause the
requirement for more memory.  Some of this rumor has come from migration from
the 6x0 to the 700 -- you do need more physical memory on this machine because
of the larger virtual address space.  The 700, unlike the 6x0, has a
main-memory based MMU and requires significantly more MMU resources.

-- 
					      Mark Campbell
					      mark.campbell@ncrcae.Columbia.NCR.COM