jcurtis@baron..uucp (Jay Curtis) (03/15/91)
Hi.
I am having a problem with SCO Xenix 2.3.2GT and very low disk
transfer rates. Here is my configuration:
33 MHz 386 w/387
8 Meg ram
128K cache
Adaptec 1542B DMA=5 irq=11 i/o base=330, bios enabled, 5 Meg DMA
transfer rate
Wren V 330 Meg SCSI drive
Archive 2150S tape drive
Digiboard Com8/i Serial card
WD8003 ethernet card
With this config, I am only able to get 124K Bytes/sec. throughput under
Xenix. Under Dos I get 496 K Bytes/sec. Under ISC Unix, similar rates
to Dos. Is there a known problem with the scsi drivers under Xenix?
Why would throughput be so low? Running the same config except for the
drives and controller (substitue in a wd1003 controller and Maxtor 2190)
gave me double the disk throughput. Why???
Is there anything I can do to increase the thoughput of this system?
(please say yes...please!!)
--Jay
--
Jay Curtis
jcurtis@baron.UUCP
{nosc;ncr-sd;ucsd;}!baron!jcurtis
Of course my opinions are my own... Who would let me speak for them?!phil@ls.com (Phil Eschallier) (03/15/91)
In article <1991Mar15.055352.20092@simasd.uucp> jcurtis@baron..uucp (Jay Curtis) writes: >Hi. > I am having a problem with SCO Xenix 2.3.2GT and very low disk >transfer rates. Here is my configuration: >33 MHz 386 w/387 >8 Meg ram >128K cache >Adaptec 1542B DMA=5 irq=11 i/o base=330, bios enabled, 5 Meg DMA transfer rate >Wren V 330 Meg SCSI drive >Archive 2150S tape drive >Digiboard Com8/i Serial card >WD8003 ethernet card >With this config, I am only able to get 124K Bytes/sec. throughput under >Xenix. Under Dos I get 496 K Bytes/sec. Under ISC Unix, similar rates >to Dos. Is there a known problem with the scsi drivers under Xenix? >Why would throughput be so low? Running the same config except for the >drives and controller (substitue in a wd1003 controller and Maxtor 2190) >gave me double the disk throughput. Why??? i have a very similar configuration here ... a 20mhz 386, 8 meg ram, adaptec 1542b (configured as you do) and an xt-8760s ... the differences are i have don't linked the xnx155b (upgrade to 2.3.3) and xnx252b (new adaptec scsi driver) -- i have now getting about 383k bytes/sec thoughtput. i did not run any test prior to SLS'ing my system but i feel that the response time is noticably faster. now a question for folks out there using a similar configuration. when i bring down the systems (via a haltsys or reboot), i must press the reset button to affect a hard reset before the computer will recognize the adaptec scsi controller -- do i have my system set up wrong or is there no way to reboot xenix without a hard reset (ie reset button or cycle the power) ??? -- Phil Eschallier | E-Mail to: US Mail to: | INET: phil@ls.com 248B Union Street Lagniappe Systems | UUCP: ...!uunet!lgnp1!phil Doylestown, PA 18901 Computer Services | CIS: 71076,1576 VOICE: +1 215 348 9721
karl@robot.in-berlin.de (Karl-P. Huestegge) (03/16/91)
jcurtis@baron..uucp (Jay Curtis) writes: > I am having a problem with SCO Xenix 2.3.2GT and very low disk >transfer rates. Here is my configuration: >Adaptec 1542B DMA=5 irq=11 i/o base=330, bios enabled, 5 Meg DMA > transfer rate >Wren V 330 Meg SCSI drive >Archive 2150S tape drive >With this config, I am only able to get 124K Bytes/sec. throughput under >Xenix. Under Dos I get 496 K Bytes/sec. Under ISC Unix, similar rates >to Dos. Is there a known problem with the scsi drivers under Xenix? Well, you should get 960 KB/s under DOS, 700 KB/s under tuned ISC Unix (remember they have a fast-filesystem) and > 400KB/s under tuned Xenix. Did you enable Synchronous Negotiation on the Host Adapter and the Drives (close jumper 5 Pin 1) ? Did you enable Parity on all Devices (open pin3 jumper 5 on the Host Adapter)? First test it under DOS with the GREAD.EXE-Utility from Adaptec (uucp-download from adaptex). With plain xenix you should get 290 KB/s on your Wren V. Then tune the xenix kernel with adb to optimize the boson/bosoff times of the scsi-transfer (you can get the recipe per uucp from adaptex 'sco.patch'). Or do: adb -w /xenix ; tune the DMA speed to a higher value 'ad_xfer /b' returns 0 (=5MB/s). Set it to 4(=5.7MB/s), 1(6.7MB/s) or 2(8MB/s) with the command 'ad_xfer /w 1'. 'ad_buson/b' returns a value of 5. Set it to 8-10 ('ad_buson/w 8'). 'ad_busoff/b' returns a value of 7. Set it to 4 ('ad_busoff/w 4'). exit adb with '$w' '$q'. >(please say yes...please!!) yes. -- Karl-Peter Huestegge karl@robot.in-berlin.de Berlin Friedenau Bus: 2,25,48,81,85 U-Net: Bhf.F.Wilh.Pl. ..unido!fub!geminix!robot!karl
mattij@tuura.UUCP (Matti Joutkoski) (03/17/91)
jcurtis@baron..uucp (Jay Curtis) writes: >Hi. > I am having a problem with SCO Xenix 2.3.2GT and very low disk >transfer rates. Here is my configuration: >Adaptec 1542B DMA=5 irq=11 i/o base=330, bios enabled, 5 Meg DMA > transfer rate >Wren V 330 Meg SCSI drive >Archive 2150S tape drive >With this config, I am only able to get 124K Bytes/sec. throughput under >Xenix. Under Dos I get 496 K Bytes/sec. Under ISC Unix, similar rates >to Dos. Is there a known problem with the scsi drivers under Xenix? Hi there, This has been always the same, there is a patch which should improve the disk performance with SCSI, but it doesn't make any difference. One thing you could check is, that all your SCSI-devices are in the SYNCHRONOUS-mode. It makes difference, default parameters what I have seen has usually been ANYNC. DMA-speed between Adaptec and Motherboard doesn't make any difference, because the botleneck is not there. These next words I have wanted to say all of my life: I never seen so STUPID SCSI-drivers!!!! --------------------------------------- >drives and controller (substitue in a wd1003 controller and Maxtor 2190) >gave me double the disk throughput. Why??? Yap, and if you are using some AT-IDE harddisks, you will get more disk- performance. That's the truth. There have been aloooong time rumours, that SCO will release Xenix/386 version with INTERACTIVE-SCSI-drivers (at last) and the version number is 2.3.4. It should be released during this spring. But people who want more performance: Buy a un-expensive AT-IDE harddisk (ex. 100 MB, almost in every modele there is cache included) and put your root-filesystem in there. You will SEE the difference. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Matti Joutkoski, mattij@yj.data.nokia.fi, tel. + 358-0-5673866. ---------------------------------------------------------------
paulz@sco.COM (W. Paul Zola) (03/19/91)
In article <1991Mar15.055352.20092@simasd.uucp> jcurtis@baron..uucp (Jay Curtis) writes: } }Hi. } I am having a problem with SCO Xenix 2.3.2GT and very low disk }transfer rates. Here is my configuration: } [details of slow Adaptec-based system deleted] } }Is there anything I can do to increase the thoughput of this system? }(please say yes...please!!) Yes there is. I strongly urge you to install Support Level Supplement (SLS) xnx252 on your system. This SLS contains high-performance Adaptec drivers - I'm sure you'll find your system performance much improved after installing them. SLS xnx252 is availible for anonymous UUCP from sosco, and for anonymous ftp from ftp.uu.net. It should also be availible from your dealer or distributor. In addition, you might want to use Roy Neese's excellent program SCSICNTL.EXE to set the SCSI parameters for your host adaptor and disks. } }--Jay } }-- }Jay Curtis }jcurtis@baron.UUCP }{nosc;ncr-sd;ucsd;}!baron!jcurtis }Of course my opinions are my own... Who would let me speak for them?! - Paul Zola Software Support Engineer paulz@sco.COM Gotta tend the earth if you want a rose. - Emily Saliers DISCLAIMER: I speak for myself, and not for SCO.
larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) (03/19/91)
paulz@sco.COM (W. Paul Zola) writes: >improved after installing them. SLS xnx252 is availible for anonymous >UUCP from sosco, and for anonymous ftp from ftp.uu.net. It should ftp.uu.net? Maybe uunet.uu.net? -- Larry Snyder, NSTAR Public Access Unix 219-289-0287 (HST/PEP/V.32/v.42bis) regional UUCP mapping coordinator {larry@nstar.rn.com, ..!uunet!nstar.rn.com!larry}
ed@mtxinu.COM (Ed Gould) (03/20/91)
>>for anonymous ftp from ftp.uu.net >ftp.uu.net? Maybe uunet.uu.net? ftp.uu.net is correct. Currently, that's a CNAME (nickname) for uunet.uu.net, but it may not always be. -- Ed Gould mt Xinu, 2560 Ninth St., Berkeley, CA 94710 USA ed@mtxinu.COM +1 415 644 0146 "I'll fight them as a woman, not a lady. I'll fight them as an engineer."