terry@pride386.UUCP (Terry Lyons) (03/16/90)
Maybe I'm asking the wrong questions is ANYONE using the exclan(sp) setup that sco pushes as xenix net? would like to create a distributed file system (with 2+ computers) I am using sco xenix 2.3.0 I have gotten some suggestions as to changing to AT&T's, if I must I must but would like to stay with pc clones (386 486 286 ) if no one answers this time I guess I'll have to take the sales dept's word for it ( last time I did that I became the owner of a TRS80 mdl III ). opinions PLEASE terry -- ************************************************************************** * UUNET ...!pride386!terry * FAX (714) 739 - 2203 * * Pern is a dragons best freind * **************************************************************************
fff@mplex.UUCP (Fred Fierling) (03/17/90)
In article <248@pride386.UUCP>, terry@pride386.UUCP (Terry Lyons) writes: > is ANYONE using the exclan(sp) setup that sco pushes as xenix net? > would like to create a distributed file system (with 2+ computers) We use Xenix Net with Excelan hardware between a 286 and a 386. It works as advertised, but doesn't break LAN performance records. We find it a bit shaky when one machine shuts down but that could easily be fixed in the latest release. I would suggest you look into NFS though, if I understand correctly it's much more versatile. -- Fred Fierling uunet!van-bc!mplex!fff Tel: 604 875-1461 Fax: 604 875-9029 Microplex Systems Ltd 265 East 1st Avenue Vancouver, BC V5T 1A7, Canada
danielw@wyn386.mi.org (Daniel Wynalda) (03/19/90)
In article <376@mplex.UUCP> fff@mplex.UUCP (Fred Fierling) writes: >In article <248@pride386.UUCP>, terry@pride386.UUCP (Terry Lyons) writes: >> is ANYONE using the exclan(sp) setup that sco pushes as xenix net? >> would like to create a distributed file system (with 2+ computers) > >We use Xenix Net with Excelan hardware between a 286 and a 386. It works as >advertised, but doesn't break LAN performance records. We find it a bit shaky >when one machine shuts down but that could easily be fixed in the latest >release. I would suggest you look into NFS though, if I understand correctly >it's much more versatile. We use Xenix-net with Excelan hardware between two 386 boxes running Xenix and 1 DOS 286. The file transfer speeds seem to be about the speed of a floppy drive. The previous comment mentions looking at NFS. There are probably advantages to both schemas. One thing that I find useful with Xenix-Net that you don't get with NFS is access to remote devices. Because the ENTIRE FILESYSTEM of the remote computer is on your system, you can access all of the devices etc as well. For example, I use a modem on one machine from a terminal program on the other machine. It works very well. It is, as mentioned, usable but not a screamer. I would recommend it though. All of the excelan utilities work well as well (ftp, telnet, rlogin, rsh, rpr etc) Daniel Wynalda -- Daniel Wynalda | Telephone: (616) 866-1561 X22 Ham: N8KUD Wynalda Litho Inc. | danielw@wyn386.UUCP danielw@wyn386.mi.org 8221 Graphic Ind Pk. | I believe everyone should be responsible for their own Rockford, MI 49341 | actions. Thus I don't speak for this org. herein.
itkin@mrspoc.Transact.COM (Steven M. List) (03/20/90)
terry@pride386.UUCP (Terry Lyons) writes: >Maybe I'm asking the wrong questions >is ANYONE using the exclan(sp) setup that sco pushes as xenix net? >would like to create a distributed file system (with 2+ computers) >I am using sco xenix 2.3.0 >I have gotten some suggestions as to changing to AT&T's, if I must I must but >would like to stay with pc clones (386 486 286 ) >if no one answers this time I guess I'll have to take the sales dept's word >for it ( last time I did that I became the owner of a TRS80 mdl III ). >opinions PLEASE We are using SCO XENIX 2.3.2GT with XENIX-NET and Excelan cards and TCP/IP software. It works fine. We've installed and tuned SMAIL 3.x and do file transfers and have some PC's hooked up and... No problems that we're aware of. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ : Steven List @ Transact Software, Inc. :^>~ : : Chairman, Unify User Group of Northern California : : {apple,coherent,limbo,mips,pyramid,ubvax}!itkin@guinan.Transact.COM :
ron@rdk386.uucp (Ron Kuris) (03/21/90)
In article <248@pride386.UUCP> terry@pride386.UUCP (Terry Lyons) writes: >Maybe I'm asking the wrong questions >is ANYONE using the exclan(sp) setup that sco pushes as xenix net? >would like to create a distributed file system (with 2+ computers) >I am using sco xenix 2.3.0 >I have gotten some suggestions as to changing to AT&T's, if I must I must but >would like to stay with pc clones (386 486 286 ) >if no one answers this time I guess I'll have to take the sales dept's word >for it ( last time I did that I became the owner of a TRS80 mdl III ). >opinions PLEASE >terry Excellan(sp?) is horrible! Trying to get mail to go through a machine like is nearly impossible. Problems I had were: (1) Performance for a 'connect' is horrible. They had an 8 processor sequent on the other side and it still takes 10+ seconds to connect. (2) rlogin equivalency doesn't work at all, regardless of your .rhosts files. (3) There is no sendmail; instead, a kludgy smtp.config file which doesn't have enough of the RFC's built into it. Example: Comments are treated incorrectly in From: and To: lines. (4) Due to the architecture, its nearly impossible to install something like smail on top of this system. (5) The front end 'mail' software they provide doesn't even understand 'foo@bar'. All in all, I would much rather work with the Lachman TCP/IP stuff. The beta version I saw had fewer bugs (AND you get sendmail). /-----------------------------------\/\/\/\ | {unify|{sactoh0!siva}}!rdk386!ron | o o | | Cut this out and present it to me | - | | for a FREE $20.00 bill! Expires | awk | | upon presentation. | | \-----------------------------------/ \ -- /-----------------------------------\/\/\/\ | {unify|{sactoh0!siva}}!rdk386!ron | o o | | Cut this out and present it to me | - | | for a FREE $20.00 bill! Expires | awk |
mark@promark.UUCP (Mark J. DeFilippis) (03/21/90)
In article <212@wyn386.mi.org>, danielw@wyn386.mi.org (Daniel Wynalda) writes: > We use Xenix-net with Excelan hardware between two 386 boxes running Xenix > and 1 DOS 286. The file transfer speeds seem to be about the speed > of a floppy drive. The previous comment mentions looking at NFS. There > > Because the ENTIRE FILESYSTEM of the remote computer is on your system, > you can access all of the devices etc as well. For example, I use You say the "ENTIRE FILESYSTEM". I have a question for you. If I have a DBMS physically on one machine, can I run an application against the database on the remote machine? Assuming I have a way to tell the DBMS what the path to the DBMS is. For example, INFORMIX-ESQL/C. If I specify on the local machine in an environment, DBPATH=/u/whatever, will the application work if I specify DBPATH=machine!/u/whatever? Anyone know the answer to this? What kind of performance degradation am I looking at? I would think a DBMS would not care where the data is comming from, and the request would be mapped to the device driverat the kernel level where the tcp/ip stuff-ola is happening? -- Mark J. DeFilippis SA @ Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Adelphi University, Garden City, NY 11530 (516) 663-1170 UUCP: philabs!sbcs!bnlux0!adelphi!markd
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/22/90)
In article <376@mplex.UUCP> fff@mplex.UUCP (Fred Fierling) writes: | I would suggest you look into NFS though, if I understand correctly | it's much more versatile. I believe that SCO has decided not to sell the NFS product for Xenix. I suspect that this was a marketing decision, although the version they have may be buggy in some non-obvious way. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc "Getting old is bad, but it beats the hell out of the alternative" -anon