Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!cs.umass.EDU"!"FRODO::MOSS
From: FRODO::MOSS@cs.umass.EDU ("Eliot Moss, GRC A351B, x5-4206")
Newsgroups: mod.computers.vax
Subject: VaxStar's and bigger disks
Message-ID: <8703191522.AA29458@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Wed, 18-Mar-87 06:57:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8703191522.AA29458
Posted: Wed Mar 18 06:57:00 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Mar-87 04:49:39 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 40
Approved: info-vax@sri-kl.arpa

VaxStar's (officially MicroVax/VaxStation 2000's) come with room for a disk
in their box, and two disks are standardly offered: the RD32 (40 megabytes)
and the RD53 (about 70 megabytes). While it is not mentioned in the DEC
configurations, etc., is it in fact POSSIBLE to put in an RD54 (150
megabytes)? What difficulties might be encountered?

We may actually be able to perform a test, since we have a "seed" unit
VaxStar from DEC, but if anyone out there in netland has specific knowledge,
we would appreciate hearing about it. Comments from DEC engineers are
welcome!

Except for the disk space limitations, VaxStar's meet my project's needs. I
would prefer each system to have its own disk, since providing a server for
diskless workstations will probably somewhat reduce performance, definitely
reduce the number of workstations I can afford, give a single point of
failure (the disk server), and reduce our ability to provide a mix of VMS
and Ultrix systems -- not mention force reliance on less well debugged
software (LAVC or NFS (which is not even available yet)). But some of the
things we want to do simply will not fit on an RD53.

I don't like the 6 megabyte main memory limit either, but might be able to
live with it; while we're at it, are there any rumblings that indicate that
that limit can be gotten around? Perhaps a later upgrade to bigger memory
chips? Or a bigger piggyback board?

I can understand DEC's position that these are low end systems and that they
don't want them too upgradeable, since it would undermine there other
MicroVax offerings. But there is a factor of two price jump to the next
system, which will encourage a lot of pressure towards the sort of things I
am suggesting in this note. A more continuous spectrum (e.g., not dropping
the MicroVax RC) would have been more reasonable from a consumer's point of
view. The point is, if all I need is increased disk space and a low end
system is otherwise satisfactory, I shouldn't have to spend three times what
the disk costs just to get up to a system that lets me plug in the disk --
especially when the disk in question is in the same technological family.
That is, I can understand about not being able to put an RA81 on a VaxStar,
but why not an RD54? Enough opinion! Please send your answers (if you have
them) to:
			MOSS@cs.umass.edu
and thanks!