Xref: utzoo comp.os.vms:22439 comp.sys.dec:2624
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!haven!vrdxhq!pbs!sdroppers
From: sdroppers@pbs.uucp (Seton Droppers)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms,vmsnet.misc,comp.sys.dec
Subject: Re: Questions, VMS 5.1 to 5.2 or 5.3
Summary: Only a couple of responses so far
Message-ID: <6156.25d13b32@pbs.uucp>
Date: 8 Feb 90 14:26:09 GMT
References: <6098.25cd391d@pbs.uucp>
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA
Lines: 56

In article <6098.25cd391d@pbs.uucp>, sdroppers@pbs.uucp (Seton Droppers) writes:
> We are considering upgrading from VMS 5.1-1 to either 5.2 or 5.3
> (we have both distributions now).  My manager, however, wants to
> know what others have found after the "problems" we had upgrading
> to VMS 5.0.
> 
> We run a cluster of 2 8650s and 2 785s, along with 6 Giga-bytes
> of disk storage arranged with RA82s, RA81s, and RA60s.  When we
> upgraded from VMS 4.7 to VMS 5.1-1 we lost capacity for about 10
> users on each 8650 (from about 95 to about 85).  This was lost
> through both increased memory usage and increased system
> overhead, our paging went up a bit. This did not surprise me a
> lot and fits with what most of the rest of you found as well.  My
> manager, however, felt very bad and wonders what problems are
> lurking behind the curtain of VMS 5.2/5.3.  He would very much
> like to hear what experiences others have had with a similar
> environment when you upgrade to VMS 5.2 or 5.3.  He is also
> interested in hearing what others have to say, 5.2 or 5.3?

So far I have gotten two responses to this, which was originally posted only in
comp.os.vms (and thus to INFOVAX):

Pete Kaiser, of DEC, who runs an LAVC cluster called me to say he has been
running VMS 5.3 since November 1989 with no problems.  The upgrade went very
smoothly, with the only know patch required being a secruity patch.  He
suggested calling Colorado to check on the security patch.  He noted no change
in performance.  Another plus with going to 5.3 was the support for the latest
release of DECwindows.

Alan Weitzsacker (CANSYS%CANISIUS.BITNET%CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu) mailed a
note saying the problems he is aware of have been with the new version of
BACKUP.  He suggested following up on the BACKUP issue before going ahead with
the installation of VMS 5.3.

I am still looking for any other comments.  Our department director is using
this and another item as a trial baloon for using usenet, so don't hesitate to
flood us with responses.  He is also looking to talk with some one that has a
site similar to ours (2x8650, 2x785, 6Gig disk, All-In-1 and Mixed "Time
Share") that has been able to upgrade to 5.3, so let me know if it is OK for
him to call (he may only want to call one or two sites, but let me know
anyway).

Please E-Mail your comments to me.  I will attempt to summarize
the responses again.

Thank you very much for your time and effort.

If you have tried to mail to us and it has bounced, sorry.  We are still a pure
UUCP site and that sometimes causes trouble.

Seton R. Droppers, Systems Manager
Public Broadcasting Service, Computer Services

UUCP:	...{vrdxhq,csed-1,IDA.ORG}!pbs!sdroppers
Voice:	703/739-5100
USMail:	1320 Braddock Place Alexandria, VA  22314-1698