bjorn@alberta.UUCP (Bjorn R. Bjornsson) (08/08/86)
I would like to here about peoples experiences with Amdahl UTS and/or IX/370 under VM. Indications of implementation quality, efficiency, horror stories, price (including maintainance if available), etc., is what I'm looking for. Doubly interesting would be any info relating the above to an IBM 4341. Thanks, Bjorn R. Bjornsson Department of Computing Science University of Alberta alberta!bjorn
narayan@twg-ap.UUCP (Narayan Mohanram) (08/09/86)
There is no comparison between the two. UTS is fast, and real UN*X.
Also with the Amdahls' session functionality, you can't beat it. It
is by far the best System 5 I have seen to date.
IX370 on the other hand runs on top of RSS which is the real OS
which runs on top of VM. You have problems in flakiness of the
system. Also as process are all controlled by RSS, signaling
has a few quirks that are really frustrating.
If you need to work in the kernel, IX370 leaves a lot to be desired.
--
Narayan Mohanram
Phone: 415-962 7170
ARPANET twg-ap!narayan@lll-tis-b.ARPA Down for the moment
Usenet ihnp4!amdahl!wg3b20!narayan
Mail The Wollongong Group
1129 San Antonio Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303. USA
=========================================================
|| If you can't lick it, try some whipped cream ||
=========================================================davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (Davidsen) (08/15/86)
In article <39@alberta.UUCP> bjorn@alberta.UUCP (Bjorn R. Bjornsson) writes: >I would like to here about peoples experiences with >Amdahl UTS and/or IX/370 under VM. Indications of >implementation quality, efficiency, horror stories, >price (including maintainance if available), etc., >is what I'm looking for. We have been running IX/370 for some time. The following is my personal experience with it... the kermel is SysV as you would hope. The utilities *seem* to be the PC/IX utilities, SysIII with additional non-standard commands and options hung on. For example, the 'ls' command has none of the SysV options, but there is an 'li' command which is, in many ways, better. Just don't try to run a SysV shell script. The vi editor is missing, but there is the 'e' editor (INed) which is a *fine* editor, but requires the services of a guru to run with any terminal other than vt100 or PC running PC/IX. On the good side, EMACS (UniPress) dropped in and runs perfectly. Programs larger than 100k or so tend to create lots of page faults, resulting in poor performance in realtime. The mail system is a cobbled mess of SysIII and INteractive Systems mail. When first delivered it required the text editor to read mail! My favority 'mailx' is just not there. On the good side: really truely FAST!! The C compiler must work pretty well, most programs run about 10x a VAX 11/780. This is really nice if you are working with nroff and a large document. The performance is, again, about 10x a VAX. uucp performance has been enlightening. For a while 1200 baud was the fastest speed in terms of effective thruput. This has been more or less fixed, but it is still about 2:1 slower than going VAX to VAX. Overall this is a very fast system, but not particularly compatible with most existing releases. Since a lot of the system stuff has pathnames starting with 'uts', I wonder about the source of this version. Perhaps someone running a real UTS system can tell us. There is also a SysV from AT&T now, but I don't know any details. -- -bill davidsen ihnp4!seismo!rochester!steinmetz!--\ \ unirot ------------->---> crdos1!davidsen chinet ------/ sixhub ---------------------/ (davidsen@ge-crd.ARPA) "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward"
jon@amdahl.UUCP (Jonathan Leech) (08/24/86)
In article <897@kbsvax.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (Davidsen) writes: > We have been running IX/370 for some time. The following is my personal >... > On the good side: really truely FAST!! The C compiler must work pretty > well, most programs run about 10x a VAX 11/780. This is really nice if > you are working with nroff and a large document. The performance is, > again, about 10x a VAX. On what machine? 10x 780 would be most impressive on a 4341 but dismal on a 3090. > Overall this is a very fast system, but not particularly compatible > with most existing releases. Since a lot of the system stuff has > pathnames starting with 'uts', I wonder about the source of this > version. Perhaps someone running a real UTS system can tell us. There > is also a SysV from AT&T now, but I don't know any details. UTS is Amdahl's System V port for 370 architectures. It runs both native and as a guest under VM. Since I have an obvious bias I won't say any more (but will be happy to answer questions via private mail). -- Jon Leech (...seismo!amdahl!jon) UTS Products / Amdahl Corporation __@/ This article does not represent the views of Amdahl Corporation.
faustus@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) (08/25/86)
In article <3565@amdahl.UUCP>, jon@amdahl.UUCP (Jonathan Leech) writes: > UTS is Amdahl's System V port for 370 architectures... > > This article does not represent the views of Amdahl Corporation. You mean that you've been doing this port without Amdahl's knowledge, and attatching their name to it? For shame... Wayne
jon@amdahl.UUCP (Jonathan Leech) (08/27/86)
In article <982@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU>, faustus@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) writes: > In article <3565@amdahl.UUCP>, jon@amdahl.UUCP (Jonathan Leech) writes: > > UTS is Amdahl's System V port for 370 architectures... > > > > This article does not represent the views of Amdahl Corporation. > > You mean that you've been doing this port without Amdahl's knowledge, and > attatching their name to it? For shame... > > Wayne No, I mean that people should not assume I am speaking officially for Amdahl, twit. Keep the jokes in other newsgroups. Jon Leech (...seismo!amdahl!jon) UTS Products / Amdahl Corporation __@/