[31] in 1993-clients
comments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (lwvanels@Athena.MIT.EDU)
Thu Mar 12 16:41:44 1992
From: lwvanels@Athena.MIT.EDU
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 92 16:40:59 -0500
To: 1993-clients@Athena.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: lwvanels@mit.edu
I logged in and used SAS to crunch a medium-sized data set on both the
Maxine and the RS/6000 220. I had no problems getting SAS to work on either
platform (though it produced one Xt warning on the RS/6000 when starting up,
with no other apparent problems).
The performance on the RS/6000 was dramatically better for my sample run
(10 seconds for vs. 2 minutes) when the data set was on the local disk
instead of on AFS via the translator. The performance on the Decstation was
somewhat slower than the RS/6000 going to the local disk, but not
significantly.
I did not find the smaller screen on the Maxine as inconvenient as I
originally though it might; the speed at which it could refresh the windows
eliminated a lot of the delay and annoyance that would normally be caused by
having to use vtwm and iconify windows.
IBM seems to have done a very good job of keep the changes between 3.1 and
3.2 very much under the covers for the users; the only applications I found
that failed to work right off the bat were "monitor" and "lsof". Both of
these parse kernel data structures which had changed, (and are documented in
the release notes).
-Lucien
