Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:4389 comp.unix.questions:9529
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rcj@moss.ATT.COM
From: rcj@moss.ATT.COM
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Will we be overloading the AT&T 6386E WGS?
Keywords: 6386E, 3B2/500 or 600, 24 users, 3 printers, etc..
Message-ID: <34165@clyde.ATT.COM>
Date: 3 Oct 88 02:49:28 GMT
References: <513@icus.islp.ny.us>
Sender: nuucp@clyde.ATT.COM
Reply-To: rcj@moss.UUCP (Curtis Jackson)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany NJ
Lines: 20

In article <513@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.islp.ny.us (Lenny Tropiano) writes:
}applications, where the 3B2 line cannot support these.  Does the 3B2
}handle I/O bound processes better than the 6386E WGS?  Our programs
}are mainly I/O bound, and do little CPU computation (no heavy mathematic
}calculations).

I have often and violently expressed my distaste at AT&T's marketing types
for trying to market the 6386 as a many-user machine, but I must admit that
if your applications are indeed I/O bound you probably cannot get a much
better bang for the buck than the 6386E for your application.  It has the
horsepower (CPU) to handle what you want, and I have found it's I/O and
cacheing (sp?) to be more than fast and adequate.  I highly recommend it
over the 3B2 of any flavor, and I think you will find the Unix that comes
with it (I *hope* you're buying AT&T SVR3.1 or SVR3.2!) to be a breath of
fresh air if you have ever worked with a 3B1 or 3B2.  I have also painlessly
ported many tools from our Vaxen to the 6386E -- I would much rather work
on my 6386E than on our Vax 8810.

Curtis Jackson	-- att!moss!rcj  201-386-6409
"The cardinal rule of skydiving and ripcords:  When in doubt, whip it out!"