From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 8128 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2022 17:31:56 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 9 Jan 2022 17:31:56 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 63F019C177; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 03:31:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4CEE9C0BF; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 03:31:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 86D899C0BF; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 03:31:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ua1-f44.google.com (mail-ua1-f44.google.com [209.85.222.44]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD5B49C0BE for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 03:31:16 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ua1-f44.google.com with SMTP id r15so19691278uao.3 for ; Sun, 09 Jan 2022 09:31:16 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=L6Iy6OyYizWOfvlJtKFBFHY1PIIw36DYi5Ji83YsoiY=; b=1hUI5xKk0vuWHBWUMZWylcVPi+vi+GTYQY9uBeOaKduDALcCQdcaAvRHgDarw+xqhW oXYhbyMixMwPpLYlsJkX5k+n+4pcJ0hDAYD7YtjOwo7hJ7+GqtLP3P32cX7Q4P8u5Vl7 aAfHsbkWAd38C/s4nTgvfiztUGxoqjcskC7JwcpQU5dwlDHRYvZrvAVKsEnzF7gS+GYN jPgJgVzz5sWWv80tqoVrLtbthcDEOt/xAWdBuXhf4iMcv0272EU7gCcGIb3IAm3dUgNr 10KlNusln8gLA1EZ25ewWRMHDVIudGhWeKsVINYhAna4z6raWdO6SBi5HIgraaN2vcAj 56ew== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532woNbQtmjcmcUjRfruEx5KoZrTjuHHhP2hTHnmK+nJV46HwL7J 73zKuj0OHnk3AuVYL0RPkbld4ULvEIoGob8Wan8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwgHOjnBYPrTJQx+wJrMcJQ7XhtDfi+FTguX2L26+/O01ebZAwI2AR58ENRg33BKpCCXAj5AsME+rGSp1epk6Q= X-Received: by 2002:a67:d207:: with SMTP id y7mr24304795vsi.28.1641749475787; Sun, 09 Jan 2022 09:31:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <97f563fa-5a17-424b-acc6-07cf127f496d@localhost> <20220103234411.GA19828@mcvoy.com> <20220103235600.GA68567@eureka.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20220103235600.GA68567@eureka.lemis.com> From: Stuart Remphrey Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 01:31:03 +0800 Message-ID: To: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005086aa05d5299682" Subject: Re: [TUHS] SMP: BSD vs System V (once was: moving directories in svr2) X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000005086aa05d5299682 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" There were others that also did Unix SMP (some on BSD). Encore offering BSD, AT&T or Mach (their storage arrays contained a core cluster of 2 SMP nodes, later bought by Sun); Sequent; and Pyramid dualPort OS/x around 1985/87. Pyramid had dual-CPU 90Mx/98x and I think a single lock (memory fades a bit). Later more fine-grained around the time of the 1-CPU 9810 up to 4-CPU 9845. Before eventually going to MIPS CPU SMPs, then adding MPP to the MIPS range. IIRC, this was on a mostly-BSD 4.2/4.3 base(?) when I worked in the Pyramid team producing their POSIX threads library & parallel debugger (late 80s). Although Pyramid did have their ATT "unverse" incorporated into the same Unix, hence dualPort. So there was a bunch of SVR3/4 support included: extra set of syscalls; u.u_universe to select which; conditional symbolic links using u.u_universe to resolve to UCB or ATT paths for lib & bin dirs; merged TTY driver with a superset of stty attributes; etc. Apollo Domain had something similar to conditional symbolic links, but expanding environment variables to determine the target path. Different flexibility/overhead tradeoff. I wonder if any dualPort or DC/OSx Pyramid source survives... or the old Australian promo poster from PTC BURP, where I got elected the PHB, standing like a dork at the console of a 9840 cabinet (I think I was the only one in a long sleeve shirt that day, and had an emergency tie at the back of my desk drawer, so...) On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 08:04 Greg 'groggy' Lehey, wrote: > On Monday, 3 January 2022 at 15:44:11 -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 05:21:51PM -0600, Doug McIntyre wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 04:15:08PM -0500, Dan Cross wrote: > >> I'd agree, 2.4 was pretty slow and chunky, 2.5 was alright, but 2.5.1 > was quite usable and stable. > >> Also by this time, the hardware was going in directions that SunOS > wouldn't keep up with. > > > > Yeah, Doug is right, SunOS was pretty simple, it didn't really take > advantage > > of SMP, Greg Limes tried to thread it but it was too big a job for one > guy. > > > > That's not to say that SunOS couldn't have evolved into SMP, I'm 100% > > sure it could have. It just didn't. It's a shame. > > An interesting question. I had always thought that SMP was (one of?) > the technical reasons why Sun moved from a BSD to a System V base. > Since then, of course, we've done lots of work on SMP support for at > least FreeBSD. Does anybody have an overview of how good the support > is compared to modern Solaris? Is there any intrinsic reason why one > should be better than the other? > > Greg > -- > Sent from my desktop computer. > Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key. > See complete headers for address and phone numbers. > This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program > reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA.php > --0000000000005086aa05d5299682 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There were others that also did Unix SMP (some on BSD). E= ncore offering BSD, AT&T or Mach (their storage arrays contained a core= cluster of 2 SMP nodes, later bought by Sun); Sequent; and Pyramid=C2=A0du= alPort OS/x around 1985/87.

Pyramid = had dual-CPU 90Mx/98x and I think a single lock (memory fades a bit). Later= more fine-grained around the time of the 1-CPU 9810 up to 4-CPU 9845. Befo= re eventually going to MIPS CPU SMPs, then adding MPP to the MIPS range.
IIRC, this was on a mostly-BSD 4.2/4.3= base(?) when I worked in the Pyramid team producing their POSIX threads li= brary & parallel debugger (late 80s).

=

Although Pyramid did have the= ir ATT "unverse" incorporated into the same Unix, hence dualPort.= So there was a bunch of SVR3/4 support included: extra set of syscalls; u.= u_universe to select which; conditional symbolic links using u.u_universe t= o resolve to UCB or ATT paths for lib & bin dirs; merged TTY driver wit= h a superset of stty attributes; etc.

Apollo Domain had something similar to conditional symbolic l= inks, but expanding environment variables to determine the target path. Dif= ferent flexibility/overhead tradeoff.

I wonder if any dualPort or DC/OSx Pyramid source survives...=
or the old Australian promo poster from PTC BURP, w= here I got elected the PHB, standing like a dork at the console of a 9840 c= abinet (I think I was the only one in a long sleeve shirt that day, and had= an emergency tie at the back of my desk drawer, so...)


On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 08:04 Greg 'groggy&= #39; Lehey, <grog@lemis.com> wrote:
On Monday,=C2=A0 3 January 2022 at 15:44:11 -0800, Larry = McVoy wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 05:21:51PM -0600, Doug McIntyre wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 04:15:08PM -0500, Dan Cross wrote:
>> I'd agree, 2.4 was pretty slow and chunky, 2.5 was alright, bu= t 2.5.1 was quite usable and stable.
>> Also by this time, the hardware was going in directions that SunOS= wouldn't keep up with.
>
> Yeah, Doug is right, SunOS was pretty simple, it didn't really tak= e advantage
> of SMP, Greg Limes tried to thread it but it was too big a job for one= guy.
>
> That's not to say that SunOS couldn't have evolved into SMP, I= 'm 100%
> sure it could have.=C2=A0 It just didn't.=C2=A0 It's a shame.<= br>
An interesting question.=C2=A0 I had always thought that SMP was (one of?)<= br> the technical reasons why Sun moved from a BSD to a System V base.
Since then, of course, we've done lots of work on SMP support for at least FreeBSD.=C2=A0 Does anybody have an overview of how good the support<= br> is compared to modern Solaris?=C2=A0 Is there any intrinsic reason why one<= br> should be better than the other?

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.=C2=A0 If your Microsoft mail program
reports problems, please read http:/= /lemis.com/broken-MUA.php
--0000000000005086aa05d5299682--