Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!mbcl!goldman
From: goldman@mbcl.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: MS LAN Man: HPFS386/DOS compat., non-/dedicated
Message-ID: <323.27c8ea45@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Date: 25 Feb 91 14:43:17 GMT
References: <6694@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Lines: 32

In article <6694@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kyler Laird) writes:
> I received MS LAN Manager 2.0 yesterday, but haven't begun to receive CPU's,
> or network cards and cable.  So I'm prepping...
> 
> I noticed that by using HPFS386 (and local security) I give up my ability
> to use the DOS box.  It makes sense to me that OS/2 1.3 is designed around
> the 286 and HPFS386 around the 386 so that's the problem (in an abstract way),
> but I want to know if this remains a problem when running OS/2 2.0
You don't have to give up the DOS box if you don't want to.  What you can do
is use the old (286-specific) version of HPFS, and then change the 
"PROTECTONLY=YES" statement to "PROTECTONLY=NO".  (If you use the HPFS386,
then you'll get an error message on boot.)  I understand that if you do this,
you lose user file security on the server, if you run user security.  (I can't
guarantee that this will work in your setup, but it works for me....)
> 
> Also, I am planning to run some (not many) tasks at the server.  I have 16MB
> RAM, 386DX/33.  At the server, I'll be running MS SQL Server, Imara Document
> Filing System (Server Edition), Sytron's Sytos Plus Backup, file replication,
> and some various utilities (using 'at').  I'm only concerned about the speed of
> the SQL and Document servers (and that the backup can keep up with the DAT). 
> The other processes should run with low priority.  Should I set up for a
> dedicated or non-dedicated server?  From what I've read, the dedicated setting
> doesn't leave many resources available for non-network apps.  I haven't received
> the SQL or Document Server so I don't know if they modify the net parameters
> for themselves.
I set up for non-dedicated server, and don't see any real performance
degradation (20MHz 386DX) But I'm currently running the teeniest network
imagineable (2  computers).  Your mileage may vary.
> 
... stuff deleted....

		- adrian