On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
On 06/17/2012 08:35 PM, Gregg Levine wrote:
Ahh, I know those machines well; I ran three or four of them here for
a long time, as general "utility" servers. One was my mail server, one
was my web server, one ran DNS and other network infrastructure stuff.
They were great machines. I just gave the stack of them (but retained
one =)) to a friend at VCF-East last month.
Good little machines, and reasonably power-efficient and compact while
still having enough PCI slots to do useful things.
They are based on the 21064A; considerably faster than the 21066 at
the same clock speed. I don't recall what chipset is wrapped around it.
(in either case)
And I'm darned glad it wasn't me.....
Well the fellow who got them was quite happy about it. ;)
Dave did you take those two
things the pair who handled the buy&sell process at that event were
using as foot rests? If so can you confirm that they work?
I'm not sure of what items you're talking about...can you refresh me?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Hello!
The two footrests were a pair of DEC networking gizmos that worked to
serve terminal sessions. I believe they were the bigger family members
to the Terminal servers I have.here. Those were Terminal Server model
90L+ units. I think you said they were model 25s but even I might be
remembering wrong.
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
On 06/17/2012 08:35 PM, Gregg Levine wrote:
Ahh, I know those machines well; I ran three or four of them here for
a long time, as general "utility" servers. One was my mail server, one
was my web server, one ran DNS and other network infrastructure stuff.
They were great machines. I just gave the stack of them (but retained
one =)) to a friend at VCF-East last month.
Good little machines, and reasonably power-efficient and compact while
still having enough PCI slots to do useful things.
They are based on the 21064A; considerably faster than the 21066 at
the same clock speed. I don't recall what chipset is wrapped around it.
(in either case)
And I'm darned glad it wasn't me.....
Well the fellow who got them was quite happy about it. ;)
Dave did you take those two
things the pair who handled the buy&sell process at that event were
using as foot rests? If so can you confirm that they work?
I'm not sure of what items you're talking about...can you refresh me?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
On 06/16/2012 05:21 PM, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
My Multia runs VMS. With 128 MB and a 2.5" disk it runs for two hours
and after that it crashes. Yes it runs too hot. The pedestal broke
some time ago and I"d rather not operate it horizontally. Initially
the system just had 40 MB and I wouldn't recommend that for VMS. My
Alpha Server 300 runs at the same clock speed and that system is a
lot faster. Off hand I can't recall whether the systems have the same
cpu and board logic.
Ahh, I know those machines well; I ran three or four of them here for
a long time, as general "utility" servers. One was my mail server, one
was my web server, one ran DNS and other network infrastructure stuff.
They were great machines. I just gave the stack of them (but retained
one =)) to a friend at VCF-East last month.
Good little machines, and reasonably power-efficient and compact while
still having enough PCI slots to do useful things.
They are based on the 21064A; considerably faster than the 21066 at
the same clock speed. I don't recall what chipset is wrapped around it.
(in either case)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Hello!
And I'm darned glad it wasn't me..... Dave did you take those two
things the pair who handled the buy&sell process at that event were
using as foot rests? If so can you confirm that they work?
Still working on what to launch now that I know that a name created
via dynamic DNS is acceptable.....
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
On 06/16/2012 05:21 PM, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
My Multia runs VMS. With 128 MB and a 2.5" disk it runs for two hours
and after that it crashes. Yes it runs too hot. The pedestal broke
some time ago and I"d rather not operate it horizontally. Initially
the system just had 40 MB and I wouldn't recommend that for VMS. My
Alpha Server 300 runs at the same clock speed and that system is a
lot faster. Off hand I can't recall whether the systems have the same
cpu and board logic.
Ahh, I know those machines well; I ran three or four of them here for
a long time, as general "utility" servers. One was my mail server, one
was my web server, one ran DNS and other network infrastructure stuff.
They were great machines. I just gave the stack of them (but retained
one =)) to a friend at VCF-East last month.
Good little machines, and reasonably power-efficient and compact while
still having enough PCI slots to do useful things.
They are based on the 21064A; considerably faster than the 21066 at
the same clock speed. I don't recall what chipset is wrapped around it.
(in either case)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
I've cleaned out a few entries in my bridge config. They were non-active entries, but in case someone have been off for a while, and now tries and it don't work, check with me if I commented you out. I'll happily reenable you, I just want to keep the list down a little bit...
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
My Multia runs VMS. With 128 MB and a 2.5" disk it runs for two hours and after that it crashes. Yes it runs too hot. The pedestal broke some time ago and I"d rather not operate it horizontally.
Initially the system just had 40 MB and I wouldn't recommend that for VMS.
My Alpha Server 300 runs at the same clock speed and that system is a lot faster. Off hand I can't recall whether the systems have the same cpu and board logic.
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 15:52:44
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] [Simh] Pi VAX Cluster
Yes it was. I had several of them, and I had fun with them. Until I
learned of the 21066's performance issues and UDB design's thermal
problems, I had high hopes of replacing half of our datacenter
(thousands of machines) with these little boxen.
Fortunately I was able to take one or two home after we decided not to
do that. :) I never ran VMS on them, but I did run Digital Unix, which
worked well. I later tried Linux, but in those days, on Alphas, half of
the processor cycles were spent in the alignment fixup trap handler, so
even waiting for keystroke echo was painful...not a good sign for a
processor clocked at 166MHz or 233MHz! I went back to Digital Unix in a
hurry!
-Dave
On 06/16/2012 03:46 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
I agree absolutely. It was a good beginning though.
Kari
On 16.6.2012 21:33, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/16/2012 02:31 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
Unfortunately the Multia was way too early for the customers. Nobody
seemed to understand the the point with a minimal design.
A few years later it would have been a real success.
Well...a few years later, with better cooling, and with something
other than the 21066 as its CPU. That chip had a memory controller
designed by the "NEW GUY!" and it was slower than pissing tar. The
21064's memory bandiwdth is far superior.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Yes it was. I had several of them, and I had fun with them. Until I
learned of the 21066's performance issues and UDB design's thermal
problems, I had high hopes of replacing half of our datacenter
(thousands of machines) with these little boxen.
Fortunately I was able to take one or two home after we decided not to
do that. :) I never ran VMS on them, but I did run Digital Unix, which
worked well. I later tried Linux, but in those days, on Alphas, half of
the processor cycles were spent in the alignment fixup trap handler, so
even waiting for keystroke echo was painful...not a good sign for a
processor clocked at 166MHz or 233MHz! I went back to Digital Unix in a
hurry!
-Dave
On 06/16/2012 03:46 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
I agree absolutely. It was a good beginning though.
Kari
On 16.6.2012 21:33, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/16/2012 02:31 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
Unfortunately the Multia was way too early for the customers. Nobody
seemed to understand the the point with a minimal design.
A few years later it would have been a real success.
Well...a few years later, with better cooling, and with something
other than the 21066 as its CPU. That chip had a memory controller
designed by the "NEW GUY!" and it was slower than pissing tar. The
21064's memory bandiwdth is far superior.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
I agree absolutely. It was a good beginning though.
Kari
On 16.6.2012 21:33, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/16/2012 02:31 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
Unfortunately the Multia was way too early for the customers. Nobody
seemed to understand the the point with a minimal design.
A few years later it would have been a real success.
Well...a few years later, with better cooling, and with something
other than the 21066 as its CPU. That chip had a memory controller
designed by the "NEW GUY!" and it was slower than pissing tar. The
21064's memory bandiwdth is far superior.
-Dave
On 06/16/2012 02:31 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
Unfortunately the Multia was way too early for the customers. Nobody
seemed to understand the the point with a minimal design.
A few years later it would have been a real success.
Well...a few years later, with better cooling, and with something
other than the 21066 as its CPU. That chip had a memory controller
designed by the "NEW GUY!" and it was slower than pissing tar. The
21064's memory bandiwdth is far superior.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Yes, there are only SCSI interfaces inside the Alpha Multia.
There has been a 340MB SCSI 2,5" drive as an option in some models.
I agree about the external disks, but if attaching a long cable (e.g. 10ft) and putting the disk box under the table can improve the looks. :)
Unfortunately the Multia was way too early for the customers. Nobody seemed to understand the the point with a minimal design.
A few years later it would have been a real success.
Kari
On 16.6.2012 19:07, Bob Armstrong wrote:
A 2,5" disk might produce a little less heat, but it seems to be too much
anyway.
Doesn't it require a SCSI disk, though? 2.5" SCSI disks are unobtanium
these days. And the Multia is such a cute little box - using it with
external drives ruins the whole effect.
I have a couple of UDBs/Multias too and way back when being able to run
"all three" operating systems (Windows, Unix and VMS) on the same hardware
was pretty amazing.
Bob
.
