[seul-edu] Servers and Sunrays and X (was How big a server?)

[Les Richardson <richl@mail.tfsd.sk.ca>]

Hi Andrew,

> Indeed. That's part of the SunRay architecture. The ability to run
> applications on one machine, have another as the display server and
> another doing authentication is a good thing. 

But this isn't the Sunray architecture, it's X Window. (and bloody
brilliant it is too.)

> > The Sun servers have 10 - 10k scsi drives but those boys have I/O to burn.
> > In those boxes it is used to give more "virtual ram" to enable them to run
> > the Sunrays. A poor engineering match in my view. (I don't really like the
> > Sunray at all...they're pretty, but a real X terminal would be a much
> > better solution IMHO.)
> 
> Hrm, well, no, I don't think I'd agree. The SunRay's are a pretty damn 
> good solution. They've got some neat administration tools, as well as
> the built-in smart card capability. The fact that they're running
> Solaris is somewhat of a downside, but I can get over that :-)

Sunrays, in my view, are just a way for Sun to sell servers, nothing more.
The problem lies in the horrific bandwidth demands which result from
building _part_ of the x interface in the Sunray and the rest in software 
on the Sun server. (too bad it doesn't run on Intel iron. I wonder
why....) As a result you are forced to build a network infrastructure with
cascading switches, etc. just to serve them and then _another_ network for 
everything else. (ie. between servers, other labs, etc.) I frankly don't
think it's justified under normal circumstances. The smart cards, etc are
just window dressing. Your network environment is _already_ portable, the
cards just save the login/out time, IMO.

The other issue is price. Unless you can get them for a really sweet price
(which the local division did), I think that there are better bargains in
building diskless boxes (a la LTSP) (or linux boxes running as terminals)
and multiple generic servers (which have to be used with the Sun's in any
case). There is a whole spectrum of choice from fully diskless terminals
to more normal boxes just running X.

Legendary Sun reliability? Not a chance. A couple of mainboard failures
already. (though they are very pretty and well built.) Also, due to
manufacturing defects oodles of Sunrays have been sent back for
replacement. Also have had problem with some having the _same_ MAC
address. That's not supposed to happen...

So I would stick with good quality PC hardware and the flexible range
of solutions available with X and related software. (which of course is
tremendous if one thinks back to the early days of DOS networking...yuck.)

</rant>
So, I got carried away. <grin>

Thanks for listening....

Les Richardson
H. Hardcastle School
Edam, Sk. Canada