solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

unix

    Sponsored Links

    Next

  • 1. SDS metadevices: logging
    Hi, is there any chance to activate logging on soft partitions that are "cutted" from a 2-way-mirror and soft partitions keep as raw devices? I know with filesystems ( created from a SDS volume ) that's no problem but with raw devices?? SOL 10 10/08 THX! Heinz
  • 2. Needing advice about ZFS and SAN LUNs
    Hi, I've got three 50GB SAN LUNs from an EMC box. Within the EMC Box the three LUNs were generated from a RAID-5. For my database ( SYBASE ) I need about 40GB. My first thought was to take a complete LUN in a zpool and generate different ZFS volumes for my database. However, my colleague advises me, to create a slice of about 13GB on each LUN and put them together to a zpool to get about 40GB for my database. He's understanding is that the I/O throughput should be better. I'm not familiar with ZFS so I would like to know which of the two ways is the better one, because at the end of the day all I/O is generated in the RAID-5 of the EMC Box. Thanks! Heinz
  • 3. SUNWimagick broken in OpenSolaris snv 111a
    Did someone notice that programs like f.e. import, display and convert from the SUNWimagick package are broken in OpenSolaris snv_111a? If you try to execute them you will get the following: and@viggo:~$ /usr/bin/convert bash: /usr/bin/convert: cannot execute binary file and@viggo:~$ /usr/bin/display bash: /usr/bin/display: cannot execute binary file and@viggo:~$ /usr/bin/import bash: /usr/bin/import: cannot execute binary file and@viggo:~$ pfexec /usr/bin/display pfexec: can't execute /usr/bin/display: Exec-Formatfehler and@viggo:~$ and@viggo:~$ file /usr/bin/display /usr/bin/display: ELF 64-Bit LSB ausfrbar AMD64 Version 1 [SSE FXSR CMOV FPU], er dynamischen Link verknft, Symboltabelle entfernt System is: and@viggo:~$ uname -a SunOS viggo 5.11 snv_111a i86pc i386 i86pc and@viggo:~$ isainfo -v 32-bit i386 applications ahf sse2 sse fxsr mmx cmov sep cx8 tsc fpu and@viggo:~$ psrinfo -pv The physical processor has 1 virtual Prozessor (0) x86 (GenuineIntel 6D8 family 6 model 13 step 8 clock 1700 MHz) Intel(r) Celeron(r) M processor 1.70GHz and@viggo:~$ Have a nice day! Andreas
  • 4. Need simple ping monitoring script
    Gents, I'm in a bit of a jam without the proper tools (I have no funds for). Just need a script (on Sol 9 server) that well telnet to port 5101 (every 2 seconds) on a specific foreign host and write the results to a log. (Dropping the connection after each telnet attempt). Should I do this via cron or is there a better way? Thanks in advance Ron W.

solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby shea martin » Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:13:06 GMT

I am e{*filter*}d about the new features of Solaris 10.  But it will be a 
long while before we role it out at work.  I would like to play with it 
at home, but only have an Ultra 10.  I was just wondering what the 
performance on an Ultra 10 is like, compared to solaris 8 and/or 9?  Is 
there a noticable difference for desktop use?  I mainly use the box for 
programming, so firing up an editor and possibly mozilla (though mozilla 
is unbearably slow on a U10.)

~S

Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby mark.round7 » Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:10:02 GMT

I've tested b69 on an Ultra 10, 400Mhz, 1GB Ram. It seemed to use a bit
more memory than Solaris 8/9 (with most services disabled, it seemed to
be using around 128Mb, when in the JDS desktop with a few programs
running, I was using around 300Mb). Despite the memory usage,
performance was impressive. Things seemed a lot more snappy than on
Solaris 9 - and the SMC was actually usable! (Well, it started in
record time, but wouldn't properly work after that). Mozilla is 1.7
AFAIR, and I had no complaints about its speed. Although I would have
preferred Firefox...


Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby Casper H.S. Dik » Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:12:51 GMT

shea martin < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:


Mozilla is not that bad, as long as you have enough memory.

Solaris 10 is supposed to be faster than 8 or 9.

Casper

Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby ptribble » Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:25:09 GMT

In article <C%fmd.227223$Pl.119297@pd7tw1no>,
	shea martin < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:

Performance, on a like-for-like basis, is unlikely to be significantly
different. Depends which desktop you use in both cases. If you're tight
on memory and go from CDE to JDS then you're likely to see performance
nosedive, as JDS (and gnome generally - including the likes of mozilla)
is much more memory hungry than CDE ever was.

(And the disk requirement has gone up significantly as well.)
-- 
-Peter Tribble
MRC Rosalind Franklin Centre for Genomics Research
 http://www.**--****.com/ ~ptribble/

Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby huge » Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:35:54 GMT

Casper H.S. Dik < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:

Firefox is fine on my U10, once it has started up. That takes geological
ages...


-- 
       "The road to Paradise is through {*filter*}."
        [email me at huge [at] huge [dot] org [dot] uk]



Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby Shea Martin » Thu, 18 Nov 2004 02:32:30 GMT


Is CDE still there?  I have always hated GNOME.
~S

Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby ptribble » Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:05:25 GMT

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
	Shea Martin < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:



Oh yes, CDE is still there. I haven't seen any plans to s{*filter*}it yet.

-- 
-Peter Tribble
MRC Rosalind Franklin Centre for Genomics Research
 http://www.**--****.com/ ~ptribble/

Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby Greg Menke » Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:49:09 GMT

Shea Martin < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:




Most all the other popular window managers work fine as well- I use
Windowmaker on all my solaris desktops.  Far less annoying than CDE
and much easier to deal with than Gnome- lots faster too.

Gregm


Re: solaris 10 performance on an ultra 10

Postby shea martin » Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:30:22 GMT

I used to use fluxbox, but when I upgraded about 6 months ago, the new 
beta was pretty sketch, so I started using CDE until a new release came 
out.  I actually got pretty used to CDE.  It is ugly, that whole 
dtaction/frontpanel/tooltalk thing is pretty hokey, but if you don't 
play with anything it is functional.

~S

Similar Threads:

1.Jumpstart solaris 10 b69 and solaris 10 b72 on an Ultra 30

2.Sleepy Ultra 10/Solaris 10 box

	I have here a Ultra 10 which does to a sleep mode after so long.  Where 
is that setup so I can tell the machine not to go to sleep?
-- 
Mauricio                                raub-kudria-com
(if you need to email me, use this address =)

3.Can't log in (can't type) on console on Solaris 10 on Ultra 10

4.Installing Solaris 10 on Ultra 10

I am trying to install Solaris 10 on an Ultra 10. I cannot get CDE to
launch. Are there post install steps that I am to perform? I read on a
Sun forum to run "/usr/dt/bin/dtconfig -d" I have no
/usr/dt/bin/dtconfig file? Is my installation corrupt?

5.ultra 10 / solaris 10, keyboard not responding during installation

I purchased a used ultra 10 which boots up fine... I am able to log in
as root, etc.

I downloaded  the solaris 10 (sparc) cds from sun...

when I boot up on cd 1, I get to the language selection screen and I am
unable to type anything in.

I am able to type stop a however.

any ideas what the problem might be?


thanks in advance.

6. Solaris 10 EA on Ultra 10

7. teething probs with Sun Ultra 10 & Solaris 10

8. Ultra-10 / SUN Pengiun / Solaris 10



Return to unix

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guest