Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!rice!sun-spots-request From: amdcad!cdr@decwrl.dec.com (Carl Rigney) Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun Subject: Re: Are fileservers a waste of money Keywords: Hardware Message-ID: <8905040551.AA01559@amdcad.AMD.COM> Date: 9 May 89 03:01:35 GMT Sender: usenet@rice.edu Organization: Advanced Micro Devices Lines: 99 Approved: Sun-Spots@rice.edu Original-Date: Wed, 3 May 89 22:51:49 PDT X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 7, Issue 277, message 2 of 21 In article <550@trlamct.oz> you write: >X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 7, Issue 261, message 5 of 16 > >We currently have network running SunOS 4.0 consisting of: > >fileserver Sun3/260 16M memory xylogics 451 > 1 x fujitsu eagle > 1 x fujitsu swallow If you can put faster disks on this, get Sun's new SMD-4 controller, which is supposed to double disk throughput. I don't think it will work with Eagles, though. Seriously think about getting Sun's Pegasus CPU upgrade (the 68030 that was announced 4/13) - it has a reworked I/O cache. It's supposed to significantly improve I/O, as well as giving you 7 MIPS instead of 3. >With the following diskless clients. > >1 x client Sun3/60 12M memory (lisp programming) >3 x clients Sun3/50 4M memory (lisp programming) >2 x clients Sun3/50 4M memory (C & fortran) 4 MB for SunOS 4.0 and Lisp is intensely masochistic. Are your kernals configured as small as possible? Someone just posted an article to Sun-Spots that says a diskful 4MB machine runs SLOWER than a diskless 4 MB, and a diskless 8MB machine runs twice as fast as either. That might mean you have to go 3rd party for the 3/50 memory, though. If you have the money you might see about replacing them with 8 MB 3/80's (a 68030 with cheaper memory), or even 16 MB. Another possibility you might investigate is getting one of CDC's new Wren Runner SCSI drives - these have 10.5ms access time compared to the 20-30 MB for Sun's dogs. They're also synchronous, which only helps if you have a 3/80 or 4/60; the older suns only support asynch SCSI (boo). But more memory is better than more disk, generally. >The problem is getting access to swap space on the disk. Have you split the /export/swap across both disks on your server? Also, have you looked at your ethernet to see what's going on? How much load does traffic show? Would segmenting your net cut down, or are your machines all that's on your wire? >The alternatives appear to be : > >1. New high speed disk for existing server. A waste unless you get the better controller, I suspect. >2. New more powerful fileserver with high speed disk. Upgrading the 3/260 (or just buying a 3/470 or 480) should be OK. Upgrading is cheaper, probably, but Sun's being very aggresive about Pegasus pricing. >3. Providing 3/60s or equivalent with 20 Megs for the lisp programmers > and upgrading the 3/50s. 16MB 3/80s might be good. Beware that that's all the memory they can have, though. If you have the money and your lisp works on the SPARC architecture you might consider a 16MB 4/60 - 12 MIPS for the price of a 3/60, with synchronous SCSI! Putting a Wren runner on one of those ought to be a good time! Of course, SPARC binaries are larger than 680x0, so you'll need that extra memory... >4. Providing local SCSI disks giving each client local swap space > (dataless client configuration) This is the least effective answer, probably. Especially if you buy your disks from Sun. >I personally feel that a more powerful fileserver is still going to suffer >a bottleneck at the disk with clients fighting for access to swap space, >even if a new server provided twice the disk I/O speed compared to the >existing server. You want two fast disks so you can spread the load among them, or better yet two controllers. First put as much memory as possible in your workstations, then buy a 3/480-32 with 2 SMD-4 controllers and 4 892-MB SMD Disks, or upgrade your existing 3/260 to as close to that as you can afford. For the fullblown system you're probably looking at ~ $100k before discount, but your friendly Sun sales rep would know better than I. And get Perfect Byte (or *someone*'s!) 2.3GB 8mm Tape drive for backups. Caveat! Your mileage could differ with the 3/480, 4/60, and 3/80 - after intense study we're getting the first two, but I haven't had hands-on experience yet. I'll be interested to hear what everyone else has to say. --Carl Rigney cdr@amdcad.AMD.COM {ames decwrl gatech pyramid sun uunet}!amdcad!cdr 408-749-2453 The Network is the network. The Computer is the computer. Sorry about the confusion.