Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!lll-tis!lll-lcc!pyramid!uccba!finegan
From: finegan@uccba.UUCP (Mike Finegan)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Ultrix 2.0 paging on only one disk
Message-ID: <1263@uccba.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 22-Oct-87 21:33:03 EST
Article-I.D.: uccba.1263
Posted: Thu Oct 22 21:33:03 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Oct-87 14:23:24 EST
References: <1315@mpre.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Univ of Cincinnati, College of Business Admin.
Lines: 47
Keywords: ultrix, paging
Summary: Not the answer, but ...
Xref: mnetor comp.unix.questions:4635 comp.unix.wizards:5061

In article <1315@mpre.UUCP>, parker@mpre.UUCP (Ross Parker) writes:
> 
> I recently attempted installing Ultrix 2.0 on one of our Microvax-II's.
> The pertinent bits of the system configuration are as follows:
> 
> 	- Microvax-II with 16 Mb memory
> 	- Fuji Eagle on Emulex controller as boot device (ra0)
> 	- RA-81 on KDA-50 (ra4)
> 	- tk-50 cartridge tape
> 
> I installed Ultrix 2.0 on this machine, and very quickly discovered that
> it ran like a slug... *much, much* slower than with Ultrix 1.2. 
...
> The kernel had been correctly configured for paging from both drives, both
> b partitions were set up in /etc/fstab as swap partitions, and a 'swapon -a'
> is in /etc/rc.
...
> I found out that Ultrix 2.0 is a lot larger than Ultrix 1.2, and effectively
> filled up the root partition with no room for even a second copy of vmunix.
> I had therefore increased the size of the 'a' partitions on both drives to
> twice the 'standard' size, and while I was at it, I also doubled the size
> of both 'b' partitions. I called DEC support about the problem, and their
> reply was basically that 'that was the only thing that they could think of
> that was different from the normal setup, so that must be the problem'.

I have recently been involved in installing Ultrix 2.0, and felt that the
`advanced' installation was less than advanced. If you install all the
supported software it just about fills the / file system, and if you install
Decnet, and all the optional software, it is over 100% (with 10% margin)
when you first go multi-user! The answer is the mystical precedence of
an 8 Megabyte root partition. Okay, but with +100% there are tons of soft
links to /usr/etc - at least move enough to start below 100%.
	Anyhow, we have 1 RA81 with both modified rra0a and rra0b partitions
(as well as the rest - something I had to REDO because of the lack of 
freedom in the installation script - forced default partitioning), with
12M of root and 16M of swap (2 times our 8M "core"). I would think that
this was not your problem. Our system is the same (on a 750 its hard to
tell if it's faster), definitely no worse.
	In the config files, you can not only say swapon ... but also
swapon ... size `sectors' . Did you change this to take advantage of
your new swap partition size ? I don't remember if you give the starting
sector as well. I think there is an example in the manual, or in the
Berkeley supplemental manuals. Since we only have one disk, I don't know
how that line would change for two disks.
				Hope this helps,
						Mike Finegan
				...!{hal,pyramid,decuac,mit-eddie}!uccba!finegan