[TUHS] SunOS code?
gilles at gravier.org
Wed Sep 5 03:39:00 AEST 2018
This link :
seems to have the right file (registration required, but it's free, use a
Beats my having to find a SCSI adaptor, a QIC-150 drive, and trying to read
my old QIC-150 tape with the source code on it...
Le mar. 4 sept. 2018 à 13:48, Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling at kev009.com> a
> On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso at mit.edu> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 01, 2018 at 10:05:06PM -0700, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> >> Sorry this is just bogus about being weak compared to Solaris. Are
> >> you looking back with rosy glasses or have you scanned the code in the
> >> past couple years? I have and there is nothing particularly special
> >> about Solaris internals here or elsewhere.
> > I haven't looked at Solaris code; I had just *assumed* that if they
> > were selling million dollar E10k's, they would have had NUMA support
> > at *least* as good as SGI's Irix. And it would have been an excuse
> > for their pathetic performance on UP and 2-4 SMP systems.
> One would hope so, but that was the strategy that got them eaten by a
> grue. Another funny anecdote about this aloofness.. Linux on sparc64
> uses the Relaxed Memory Order mode that the hardware offers .
> Solaris.. Total Store Order. There are tons of things like this in
> the code that blow my mind. I would have been pissed if I were on the
> hardware side of SPARC.
> >> Keep in mind IBM wants to sell RockHoppers and E980s (4 drawers, 16
> >> sockets, 768 threads) for dedicated Linux use which have similar
> >> north/south and east/west off chip networks. They have a lot of very
> >> talented people on the firmware, kernel, compilers to make these
> >> things work fast, including Paul.
> >> ...
> >> Where you start going beyond Linux-like NUMA IMO is when you get
> >> Irix-like features of page copying, migration, and multiple advanced
> >> placement policies.
> > One thing to consider is that IBM really only cared about optimizing
> > hardware for DB2, Oracle, and Webshpere. That's one of the reason why
> > you didn't see much in the way of innovative file system work, ala
> > ZFS. There was no business justification for pouring 100+ engineer
> > years to develop a next-generation file systesm --- and they had
> > already done that once already for GPFS, a cluster file system. As
> > far as local disk file system was concerned, the only real business
> > value it had was to serve as a program loader for DB2 and Websphere. :-)
> > (I'm exagerating a little for effect, but *only* a little.)
> Hmm, I think they've been pretty earnest at wanting to be 2+ years
> ahead of the general market with POWER for as long as I can see, lots
> of HPC money has been subsidizing that. Depends on the workload but
> bus and memory bandwidth right now with PCIe Gen4 and NvLink can
> really cut down on server sprawl. I've met with the GM/chief
> architect and they see OpenPOWER positioned as a full frontal
> competitor to Intel Xeon. I'm fairly disappointed in my
> contemporaries for not recognizing the value of a completely open
> source firmware and on chip controller stack; especially after the
> recent snafu where Intel changed the microcode license to disallow
> benchmarks and claimed it was an accident.
> Your statements make sense to me with respect to AIX, as Linux has
> been the main effort since the 2000s. GPFS looks neat, I wish it were
> open or at least internals documented well enough to study the
> implementation academically.
> > So as far as NUMA was concerned, there was almost certainly not have
> > been much perceived business value in having sophisticated
> > auto-migration for arbitrary workloads in the kernel. Something basic
> > which was good enough for Oracle, DB2, etc., was all that would be
> > needed. (And if you needed to hire consultants from IBM Global
> > Services to mind-meld with the configuration documentation in order to
> > get the best out of your Rockhopper.... well, shucks, darn. :-)
> That's probably the dirty little secret. It's long been profitable to
> carefully plan software interrupt handlers, user threads, and memory
> allocation even on pedestrian servers if they are running a fixed
> function. I guess Google's Borg and the new workalikes could do
> semi-automagic things with cgroups these days. There is evidence of
> people getting pretty crazy with it when we see things like Intel
> cache allocation features.
> > At IBM the business people really did make the funding decisions of
> > what to work on. ZFS could have never happened at IBM because no one
> > would have thought that a even a tiny number of IBM's current or
> > potential customer base would abandon AIX or Linux and switch to
> > Solaris, or buy Sun hardware instead of IBM hardware --- just for the
> > sake of ZFS. And that's how decision-makers at IBM really thought.
> > (And to be fair to those decision-makers, IBM is still in business as
> > a free-standing business --- and Sun is not.)
> Agreed, one of these companies is doing pretty well with a fat
> dividend yield, that other has basically been dismantled for all but a
> couple remaining desirable platform control points like Java and
> Many things in tech are happy accidents and a small number of
> motivated people at the right place and time. A Sun engineer admitted
> on some video I've seen that the green light was really given for ZFS
> because they got stumped by some UFS bugs.. once enough of ZFS was
> written to test the end to end checksumming features they found out
> some of these heisenbugs were LSI HBA and disk firmware issues :o)
> Surveying some of these filesystems.. JFS2 is a decent, nowhere near
> the capabilities of ZFS but even today it's not in dire need of
> replacement.. I suspect another issue complementary to your point is
> the standalone storage business is many $B of revenue. ESS/DS8000 and
> the like are preferred revenue. IBM and HP were more in the SAN game
> than Sun and SGI who let the customers configure systems themselves be
> used as storage (Sun was using VxFS for a long time, SGI had some CXFS
> things IIRC). Tru64 had a pretty interesting filesystem on paper,
> curious if you ever looked at its design since they open sourced it.
*Gilles Gravier* - Gilles at Gravier.org
GSM : +33618347147 and +41794728437
Skype : ggravier | PGP Key : 0x8DE6D026
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the TUHS