SNMP BABY! (was: [rescue] IBM RS/6k 48P)

[rescue at sunhelp.org]

> > Umm.  Your definition of "runs fine" is different than mine. 
> I think performance must be out of this issue here, rather "power-on
> test, see logo, machine works, power off".
As I suspected, your definition of "runs fine" really is
different  =8-).  I actually want the machine to boot an OS...
forgive me if that seems too much to ask.
 
> > The SS10 in which I played with an SM100 didn't want to run 
> > any reasonable
> > OS, and had performance which seemed lower than an SS1+.  
> > Yes, it might
> > be okay for certain tasks--but I wouldn't describe it as 
> > "runs fine".
> 
> The sounds odd to me actually. Last time I saw perf-specs on 
> the SM100, it's simply an SS2 per CPU, making it somewhat four
> SS2's on a module (roughly).

If I'm running a production system today, I want at least Solaris
2.5.1 (or SparcLinux, or *BSD/SPARC).  None of those support the
SM100 in SMP mode--from the initial testing I did, Solaris 2.5.1
was the last rev to support SM100 at all, and disabled all but
one CPU on the module (no SMP).  Also, the fact that a CPU on
an SM100 runs at 40MHz does not mean it's the same CPU as in an
SS2--from my testing it was significantly "slower" in actually
doing real work.

I'll be happy to listen to anyone who's done exhaustive recent
performance testing of an SM100 drone on...but I stand by my
statement about throwing away SM100s.  There are just some
pieces of hardware that are neither elegant nor special enough
to be retained once they're past their useful life.  (SM20
MBus modules are in the same category...)

  --Rip