Re: Are Sunblade 1000s slow?

[Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>]

> I suspected the disk, but hdparm is the only tool I know of for dealing 
> with that, but I believe that's only for IDE drives, and this box has scsi:

SCSI should be good.

> snert[@macs54]:/home/snert> mount
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part1 on / type ext3 
> (rw,errors=remount-ro)
> proc on /proc type proc (rw)
> devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620)
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part2 on /usr type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part3 on /var type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part6 on /tmp type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part7 on /spare1 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part8 on /spare2 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part4 on /home type ext3 (rw)

That's a rather ugly partition map :)

Did you read the install docs where it says to not put a filesystem on
partition number 3 and leave it as a Whole Disk to make OBP happy?

I honestly don't know what your performance problems are asttributed to.
Maybe you are expecting too much for your money :) Sun's hardware is
expensive, and generally isn't as fast in some areas as PC's. They are,
however, more reliable, and generally better for scientific computing
(e.g. they get better FPU performance). Not to mention the ability to do
64-bit computing without hassle.

-- 
Debian     - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/