Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT) From: "Karl Denninger, MCSNet" <karl@mcs.com> To: mark@quickweb.com (Mark Mayo) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PPro Question Message-ID: <m0ukcUf-000IDOC@venus.mcs.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.94.960726154101.21965B-100000@scooter.quickweb.com> from "Mark Mayo" at Jul 26, 96 03:49:50 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
>
> Hi there - I was wondering if many people have experience with PPro
> servers running FreeBSD. I just picked up a Digital Celebris XL 6150
> Pentium Pro (150MHz), and I installed FreeBSD 2.1R - no problems with the
> install, the DEC uses an NCR on-board SCSI Bios / COntroller, and
> everthing worked fine (the Celebris line use daughter cards to hold the
> CPU and Ram so you can switch between ALpha's and PPro's..)
>
> I was wondering if the following 'time' result is reasonable (for a kernel
> rebuild, all options - seemed like a good benchmark to me :-)). The
> machine only has 16 MB of RAM. The reason I ask is that I'm curious if a
> "normal" pentium 200 with SRAM would be faster..
>
> Anyways, the results:
>
> $ time make
> .
> .
> 183.8u 32.6s 5:20.20 67.9% 989+1207K 1380+59565io 61pf + 0w
>
>
> Any experience/opinions of the Pentium Pro's would be greatly appreciated.
We just picked up two PPro 200s, one with 64MB RAM, the other with 128MB.
They "feel" about 2x as fast as a P166 with otherwise identical equipment.
One of them is in production use as a news server, the other as our
"codebase" machine (yes, we finally went out and built one). People who
want to grab a -CURRENT release build can get it from codebase.mcs.net, log
in as "FTP"; you'll be at the top of the "make release" tree. The normal
"grab" files are under "R/ftp" from there. We'll normally keep a "snapshot"
type build ("make release") in there and update it every few days, but I
*cannot* promise that it will be there at any given point in time.
I can also set up a SUP server for the CVS tree if people are interested.
Would this help folks? We have *lots* of free cycles and net bandwidth, so
we're not constrained at all. What I don't think I will be able to do right
now though is keep all the other packages online (at least I can't *promise*
they will be there). Functionally, I'm not even sure what I have to sup
over here to get a "Complete" set of distributions if I want to be a mirror.
Anyone? Give me a list and amount of disk required (will it fit on a
4G drive?) and I'll go grab it. No big deal; 4G disks are only about a
kilobuck these days, and I have a bunch of them available to me. Dedicating
a machine to serving sups and builds doesn't bother me at all; as long as it
doesn't get plastered *too* badly I'll be happy to make it available to the
world. If it does we'll have to figure out a way to choke it off to the
point that I can still build my kernels and distributions for internal use.
CAUTION! The 2.1.anything floppy boot images want a "root.flp" file in the
release which IS NOT THERE on a 2.2 build. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO LOAD
A 2.2 RELEASE WITH A 2.1.ANYTHING BOOT FLOPPY! IT WILL NOT WORK!
Grab the current 2.2 "boot.flp"; that image will work properly.
I found this out the hard way...
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1 from $600 monthly; speeds to DS-3 available
| 23 Chicagoland Prefixes, 13 ISDN, much more
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1] | Email to "info@mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax: [+1 312 248-9865] | Home of Chicago's only FULL Clarinet feed!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0ukcUf-000IDOC>