Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trying Out & Failing With OpenIndiana, Solaris 11.3 On The Broadwell-EP System

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trying Out & Failing With OpenIndiana, Solaris 11.3 On The Broadwell-EP System

    Phoronix: Trying Out & Failing With OpenIndiana, Solaris 11.3 On The Broadwell-EP System

    After testing seven Linux distributions and eight BSDs on the new Xeon E5-2609 v4 Broadwell-EP + MSI X99A WORKSTATION system, I next decided to try getting some fresh Solaris-based results...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    I guees you will have better luck even with MenuetOS, they gained support for 32 GB of RAM today

    Comment


    • #3
      Very ambitious project, I'll give you that.

      Comment


      • #4
        Maybe you could try a simpler radeon card from the r500 or r300 area for installation and install Nvidia drivers later. The last time i used SunOS was with SPARC workstations or SunRay clients. At that time CDE was the most polished desktop... Would be cool to get Debian packages for CDE.

        Comment


        • #5
          That's funny slowlaris fears benchmarks. But hey, it doesn't work, so it's the most significant benchmark out there! You can be sued! /irony

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
            That's funny slowlaris fears benchmarks. But hey, it doesn't work, so it's the most significant benchmark out there! You can be sued! /irony
            Slowlaris is by no means alone in that. I don't know if it's still the case but the EULA of Microsoft SQL also banned the publication of any benchmark. It really baffles me how their brains work: they apparently believe that I, for instance, would buy a product without any possibility to verify objective results, and instead blindly trust whatever Microsoft or Oracle claim, all while simultaneously agreeing to an EULA that expressly releases them from any warranty. Yeah, that sounds likely. Not.

            Comment


            • #7
              Did you contact illumos developers or report the issue on the tracker?



              Since the issue is common to both illumos and Solaris, it is likely that very few (if nobody) have hit this issue before.
              You would certainly be able to provide debugging info with mdb.

              Last year I tried to install Debian on my aging ThinkStation D20 and the install could not complete due to a bug in the SAS controller present with several install ISOs (3 at least): I did not write a post about it, bugs happen

              Also please, do not use experimental OpenIndiana ISOs that were created for developers to test new packages and drivers for your benchmarks....

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by jollyd View Post
                Since the issue is common to both illumos and Solaris, it is likely that very few (if nobody) have hit this issue before.
                You would certainly be able to provide debugging info with mdb.
                It's also likely that very few users are using slowlaris and this could explain why nobody reported it before.

                Last year I tried to install Debian on my aging ThinkStation D20 and the install could not complete due to a bug in the SAS controller present with several install ISOs (3 at least): I did not write a post about it, bugs happen
                It's not about running it on ancient hardware and you could always use different Linux distribution. In above case you're limited to illumos or proprietary crap like slowlaris.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jacob View Post

                  Slowlaris is by no means alone in that. I don't know if it's still the case but the EULA of Microsoft SQL also banned the publication of any benchmark. It really baffles me how their brains work: they apparently believe that I, for instance, would buy a product without any possibility to verify objective results, and instead blindly trust whatever Microsoft or Oracle claim, all while simultaneously agreeing to an EULA that expressly releases them from any warranty. Yeah, that sounds likely. Not.
                  My theory is ms and oracle pays its users for using their products. There's no other explanation imho.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jollyd View Post
                    Last year I tried to install Debian on my aging ThinkStation D20 and the install could not complete due to a bug in the SAS controller present with several install ISOs (3 at least): I did not write a post about it, bugs happen
                    Saying "I had a crippling bug" without linking a bug report makes your claim invalid.

                    Remember kids, always take time to file bug reports as upstream as possible (i.e. not in your distro's bugtracker unless it is a software they develop), so the developers of the software see it.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X