pete@bally.Bally.COM (Pete Gregory) (06/22/89)
Hello y'all in netland... We are IBM RT model 135 owners, using AIX 2.2.1 (no condolences please!). We have attempted to move our Unify database to a "raw partition", according to Unify documentation, but we have been unsuccessful so far. We get wierd errors from Unify after we move the data to the raw partition, so for the time being we have given up and put the database file back into the Unix filesystem. BTW, we are using an IBM 71Mb drive in space "E" as one entire minidisk, rather than using *part* of another disk. Drive "C" is an IBM 71Mb, and drive "D" is a CDC Wren 155Mb disk (which work great!). Please E-mail your responses to me, unless someone has good, detailed information that is known to be correct and of general interest. Thanks for your help. pete@bally.COM (bally.UUCP) :: ________ Bally Systems :: |\ / \ "My boss 255 Bell St., Reno, NV :: | X IXOYE ) is a (702) 323-6156 x882 :: |/ \ ________ / carpenter."
f0057@uafhp.uucp (James E. Ward) (07/01/89)
In article <138@bally.Bally.COM>, pete@bally.Bally.COM (Pete Gregory) writes: > We are IBM RT model 135 owners, using AIX 2.2.1 (no condolences please!). > > pete@bally.COM (bally.UUCP) :: ________ Just how bad is AIX? My IBM rep is pushing it (we are planning to by an RT) of course, but is it REALLY bad? Should we get AOS instead? Any comments or help would be much appreciated. # James E. Ward, The Planet Earth, Ltd. | # # ...uunet!harris.cis.ksu.edu!f0057@uafhp | Those who speak, do not know. # # harry!uafhp!f0057@ksuvax1.cis.ksu.edu | Those who know, do not speak. # # Telenet: f0057@130.184.7.103 | Lao Tsu #
uri@arnor.UUCP (Uri Blumenthal) (07/05/89)
From article <2692@cveg.uucp>, by f0057@uafhp.uucp (James E. Ward): > > Just how bad is AIX? My IBM rep is pushing it (we are planning to by an RT) of > course, but is it REALLY bad? Should we get AOS instead? Any comments or help > would be much appreciated. I'm not sure if I should speak up (I work for IBM) - but I think AIX is OK. I work with it on RT, and so far haven't got any troubles yet (:-). More or less convenient, rather less buggy, performance - OK. Compatible with Sys.V.2, some compatibility with V.3.0, compatible with BSD... Well, what info do YOU need actually? Is it working? Yes, of course! That's what I'm keying this answer on. Is it the best UNIX? Who the hell knows... Not the worst, I bet... Uri.
pete@bally.Bally.COM (Pete Gregory) (07/06/89)
In article <2692@cveg.uucp>, f0057@uafhp.uucp (James E. Ward) writes: > > In article <138@bally.Bally.COM>, pete@bally.Bally.COM (Pete Gregory) writes: > > We are IBM RT model 135 owners, using AIX 2.2.1 (no condolences please!). > > > > pete@bally.COM (bally.UUCP) :: ________ > > Just how bad is AIX? My IBM rep is pushing it (we are planning to by an RT) of > course, but is it REALLY bad? Should we get AOS instead? Any comments or help > would be much appreciated. We have been using AIX for more than two years now, and have found it to be EXTREMELY RELIABLE. Our systems (and our customers' systems) run for weeks and months at a time without the need to reboot. Some of our programmers here have experience with BSD UNIX, and say that AIX is far better. I apologize to all who got the idea that we are having trouble with AIX. On the contrary, we are merely in need of some help from someone who has gotten raw-mode working in Unify DBMS. Anyone?... pete@bally.COM (bally.UUCP) :: ________ Bally Systems :: |\ / \ "My boss 255 Bell St., Reno, NV :: | X IXOYE ) is a (702) 323-6156 x882 :: |/ \ ________ / carpenter."