Many thanks to all who responded, and so quickly, too!
The unanimous answer was that Solaris 2.5.1 is very stable. Several
respondents are using 670MPs with 2.5.1 and find it rock-solid. Some
have suggested that 2.5.1 is in fact faster than 2.3. This is what I
was expecting to hear, but I'm glad to have real feedback about it. Now
I can go back to the vendor and ask what's wrong with THEIR software. :)
A few notes:
Ronald Loftin pointed out that 2.5.1 is the last version of Solaris to
support this architecture. I had read that when 2.6 came out, and it is
definitely something to keep in mind.
Some people provided some cost estimates on moving to an Ultra 5 or a SS
20 platform. Thanks!
"I would suggest that 2.5.1 with patches is the most stable OS that Sun
has ever produced." - Robert Montjoy
Thanks to:
Stephen Harris; Rick Reineman; Larry Pazdernik; Robert Montjoy
Tom Mornini; Ronald Loftin; Martin; Dave Yearke; Matthew Fansher
Original Question:
>I have been told by a vendor that their (upgraded, Year 2000-compliant)
>software together with Solaris 2.5.1 on a 670MP machine is not stable.
>
>Can anyone provide me with any anecdotal evidence that Solaris 2.5.1
>is not stable on this platform? I'm trying to determine whether it is really
>the O/S or the vendor's own software. I'd like to have this information to
>determine whether or not to spend the big bucks to upgrade the hardware.
Steve Boyko, NB Power
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:12:45 CDT