Re: Is E6900 == SF6900? Application(SF6800) -->Application(SF6900) ??
From: qazmlp (qazmlp1209_at_rediffmail.com)
Date: 08/08/04
- Next message: Tom Miskiewicz: "Ultra 60 boot problem"
- Previous message: Beardy: "Re: Can't run net-snmp, zlib fatal exception."
- In reply to: Gavin Maltby: "Re: Is E6900 == SF6900? Application(SF6800) -->Application(SF6900) ??"
- Next in thread: Scott Howard: "Re: Is E6900 == SF6900? Application(SF6800) -->Application(SF6900) ??"
- Reply: Scott Howard: "Re: Is E6900 == SF6900? Application(SF6800) -->Application(SF6900) ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 8 Aug 2004 02:18:32 -0700
Gavin Maltby <G_a_v_i_n.M_a_l_t_b_y@sun.com> wrote:
> > Two Questions related to the SunFire models: -
> > 1.
> > Do E6900 and SF6900 servers represent the same SunFire model?
>
> Yes; I think E6900 is just a confusion of SF6900 with the old
> Enterprise range like the E6000 and E6500. The SunFire range
> have never been known as "E..." as far as I remember.
The following SUN site has mentioning of only E6900 and not SF6900:
http://www.sun.com/servers/midrange/
> > 2.
> > We have an application which is currently running with SF6800 as the
> > base.
> > Now, we have a requirement to replace this machine with SF6900 model.
>
> Replace or upgrade? The SF6800 can accept US-IV cpus if you also
> perform the power supply upgrade.
Sorry, my post was slightly misleading. Actually, we do not want to
replace SF6800 completely with SF6900, but to upgrade the Hardware of
SF6800 to make it SF6900.
Here is where, we would like to focus on: Do we have to replace only
the SF6800:CPU boards with the SF6900:CPU boards? Are there any other
hardware upgradation needs to be done?
> > What will be the impact on the Application due to this upgrade?
> > Can the application run successfully without any changes in the other
> > layers of the Software stack(Firmware, patch set etc.)?
>
> Yes, this a guarantee that Sun makes (I believe you'll find it on
> the website somewhere). Our OS and platforms offer full forward
> binary compatability (ie, as long as it's compiled on the same
> release or older you can run it on a current machine, provided
> of course that the application sticks to the defined APIs etc
> and passes the appcert etc tests).
Ok!
> In the case that you're upgrading the cpus not bringing in a whole
> new chassis your OS won't even be changing (there are patches
> required to support US-IV - you may be running them already;
> even if not it does not affect whether things will run correctly
> or not. If your installing a new machine there's no reason to
> believe the application should misbehave any more than it might
> have done on your current setup. The patches required are
> for the cpu driver etc to understand two cores per physical cpu -
> but your application sees no changes (other than additional
> virtual cpus).
Thanks for the information!
- Next message: Tom Miskiewicz: "Ultra 60 boot problem"
- Previous message: Beardy: "Re: Can't run net-snmp, zlib fatal exception."
- In reply to: Gavin Maltby: "Re: Is E6900 == SF6900? Application(SF6800) -->Application(SF6900) ??"
- Next in thread: Scott Howard: "Re: Is E6900 == SF6900? Application(SF6800) -->Application(SF6900) ??"
- Reply: Scott Howard: "Re: Is E6900 == SF6900? Application(SF6800) -->Application(SF6900) ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
