Hi,
What are the choices for CDR drives for an Ultra 1. I have a single
SCSI drive now. Can I add dual CD drives by using an external 611
enclosure, I have one with my old IPC Sparc workstation.
Would there be any need to move from Solaris 8 to Solaris 9?

Thanks for any help. I was using Linux on my Ultra 1, but I could not take
it any more and moved to Solaris 8 :-)

Steven

In article <bevfgs$rpj$1@slb4.atl.mindspring.net>,
Steven L. Collins <steve_c@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Hi,
> What are the choices for CDR drives for an Ultra 1. I have a single
>SCSI drive now. Can I add dual CD drives by using an external 611
>enclosure, I have one with my old IPC Sparc workstation.

As far as I can tell, you can just install a SCSI CDRW drive into the
Ultra 1 replacing the original CD reader. I did this on my Ultra 1
but never got around to using the CDRW drive as anything other than
a reader. Then I moved the CDRW to a Sparc 20, where it works for
both read and write.

If that was the question you were asking. :-)

> Would there be any need to move from Solaris 8 to Solaris 9?

Not for this purpose.

carl
--
carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego
clowenst@ucsd.edu

In article <20030715101552.6df73022.hoendech@ecc.lu>,
Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:
>
>I upgraded my U1 to Solaris 9, and it's noticeably faster than
>with Solaris 8.
>

I have an Ultra 1 that runs Solaris 2.6, but for some dumb reason, Sun
removed support for older devices like the SunPC card from later releases
of Solaris. So if I want to use that card and its functionality, which
has occasionally proven useful, I have to stick with Solaris 2.6.

But the later releases also get more and more bloated as time goes on, and
maybe I would not see much benefit from the extra stuff, as its targeted
at their newer hardware, produced after the Ultra 1 generation.

If what Mr. Eeckels is saying is true, should I maybe upgrade to Solaris 9
with the Ultra 1?

How much of a performance increase can I expect to see?

One would hope that since Sun makes both the OS and the hardware that they
would be very close to optimal in performance straight from the get-go.

S.

--

From the desk of Sanjay, |\ _,,,---,,_
Shadow, PRrrr /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_
& Niji |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-'

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Sanjay Singh wrote:

> But the later releases also get more and more bloated as time goes on, and
> maybe I would not see much benefit from the extra stuff, as its targeted
> at their newer hardware, produced after the Ultra 1 generation.

Later releases do get more stuff, that's true. But it's also
true that they tend to be more efficient.

> If what Mr. Eeckels is saying is true, should I maybe upgrade to Solaris 9
> with the Ultra 1?

I would.

> How much of a performance increase can I expect to see?

Definitely noticable. When I upgraded my Ultra 1 web server
from Solaris & to 9, I actually had customers phoning me, asking
what I'd done to improve the performance.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 21:33:07 +0000 (UTC)
ssingh@crete.uwaterloo.ca (Sanjay Singh) wrote:

> In article <20030715101552.6df73022.hoendech@ecc.lu>,
> Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:
> >
> >I upgraded my U1 to Solaris 9, and it's noticeably faster than
> >with Solaris 8.
> >
>
> I have an Ultra 1 that runs Solaris 2.6, but for some dumb reason, Sun
> removed support for older devices like the SunPC card from later
> releases of Solaris. So if I want to use that card and its
> functionality, which has occasionally proven useful, I have to stick
> with Solaris 2.6.

I know - my SunPCi card keeps me from upgrading my U60 to
Solaris 9.

> But the later releases also get more and more bloated as time goes on,
> and maybe I would not see much benefit from the extra stuff, as its
> targeted at their newer hardware, produced after the Ultra 1 generation.

You don't need to install everything. Support for new devices is
done through packages, and you can remove all those you don't need.

> If what Mr. Eeckels is saying is true, should I maybe upgrade to Solaris
> 9 with the Ultra 1?
>
> How much of a performance increase can I expect to see?

The improvements made to UFS are substantial. For example,
compiling a fairly large project, with about 150 source
files, is about 25% faster on Solaris 9 than on Solaris 8,
using UFS logging.

> One would hope that since Sun makes both the OS and the hardware that
> they would be very close to optimal in performance straight from the
> get-go.

There are new insights and improvements. I'm sure they try
to get the best possible performance at all times, but a
manager's decision is not what matters here. Contrary to
popular managerial belief, it's not enough to have the
appropriate education write perfect code.

Take care,

--
Stefaan
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid