Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?

From: Andy Lennard (ck_karisma_at_SCRUB-THIS.hotmail.com)
Date: 02/24/04

  • Next message: Thomas Schulz: "Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?" 
    Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:54:10 +0000 (UTC)

    "Kent Smith" <ksmith@ipsoinc.com> wrote in message
    news:fben30l3df26v889fjo13nqqrjufdeds0a@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 20:35:42 GMT, Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Andy Lennard wrote:
    > >
    > >> Regrettably this machine uses some software that has not been (and
    never
    > >> will be) ported to anything later than Solaris2.6. In this case I'm
    stuck
    > >> with getting the best I can from what I've got...
    > >
    > >Provided the software sticks to published interfaces, running it
    > >on newer versions of Solaris shouldn't be a problem. Solaris'
    > >backwards compatibility is a big part of its value proposition
    > >(ugh, I sound like a manager - or worse, a marketroid!).
    > >
    > >It might be worth finding a spare machine, installing a newer
    > >version of Solaris, and then seeing if your app runs.
    >
    > I've been in Andy's position, I'm afraid. If you run vendor supported
    > software above its "Certified" OS rev, you lose all support from the
    > vendor. You are really trapped. Perhaps that upgrade cash could be
    > spent on the analysis of available replacements that would buy you
    > 8-10 years instead of 2-4. Bear in mind that Solaris 2.6 goes off
    > support in about 16 months.
    >
    Thanks for this sound advice. At the moment the cash needed to buy the
    hardware doesn't look too horrendous, and it would 'buy' the time to
    investigate the next step.

    I have already had a quick look at whether the system would work with, say,
    Solaris9. Most things do, but some code that we use is unavailable on
    Solaris9, or has been replaced by stuff with a different interface, or has
    been 'enhanced' and works differently on the later OE. And as this is a live
    machine at a customer site, I'll need to be very convinced before I consider
    swapping it out.

    So for now I'll concentrate on getting a bit more life from the existing
    box, with the minimum disruption and downtime on-site.

    Thanks to all responders so far. I'm now 'happy' about the hardware
    requirements. Just a bit uneasy about what patching I need to do to Solaris
    ... Unfortunately I don't have a machine to test it on before I go to the
    customer site. Oops!

    Many thanks,
    Andy.

  • Next message: Thomas Schulz: "Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?
      ... >>Provided the software sticks to published interfaces, ... >>on newer versions of Solaris shouldn't be a problem. ... machine at a customer site, I'll need to be very convinced before I consider ... I'm now 'happy' about the hardware ...
      (comp.sys.sun.hardware)
    • Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?
      ... >>Provided the software sticks to published interfaces, ... >>on newer versions of Solaris shouldn't be a problem. ... machine at a customer site, I'll need to be very convinced before I consider ... I'm now 'happy' about the hardware ...
      (comp.unix.solaris)
    • Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?
      ... >Provided the software sticks to published interfaces, ... >on newer versions of Solaris shouldn't be a problem. ... support in about 16 months. ... Advising Clients on Technology Strategy ...
      (comp.unix.solaris)
    • Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?
      ... >Provided the software sticks to published interfaces, ... >on newer versions of Solaris shouldn't be a problem. ... support in about 16 months. ... Advising Clients on Technology Strategy ...
      (comp.sys.sun.admin)
    • Re: 400-480MHz upgrade?
      ... >Provided the software sticks to published interfaces, ... >on newer versions of Solaris shouldn't be a problem. ... support in about 16 months. ... Advising Clients on Technology Strategy ...
      (comp.sys.sun.hardware)
    • Quantcast