[Info-vax] Good/best version of (Open)VMS for a VAXstation 2000?

[Paul Sture]

In article <cZcfot+ysTH4 at eisner.encompasserve.org>,
 koehler at eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:

> In article 
> <8ada4c75-3601-4ab4-a4a2-1da96df4fa00 at 32g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, "Mike K." 
> <madcrow.maxwell at gmail.com> writes:
> > Recently an emulator of the VAXstation 2000 has become available on
> > the 'Net and as I'd like to try out some of the actual VAX graphics
> > software that using it should make possible, I'm wondering if anybody
> > knows what version of (Open)VMS should fit best onto a system with
> > only 14 MB of RAM...
> 
>    4.7, using VWS, though 5.2 using VWS.  X11 based DECWindows is too 
>    much for a VAX 2000 (from first hand experience with 14MB of RAM).
> 
>    VWS will run fine in 4MB of RAM.
> 
>    Later versions of 5.x will allow you to run VWS, but I have no
>    experience since we bought them to run X11 and switched to it as
>    soon as it shipped.
> 
>    Soon after X11 DECwindows shipped, DEC addressed the poor performance
>    of the VAXSttion 2000 by announcing low cost RAM and local disk
>    upgrades.  We immediately ordered them, but we weren't happy
>    until we got our first VAXStation 3100.

There was one other interesting use for a VS2000:

When we were discussing reliability scenarios for a cluster of two 
Alphas about a mile apart, I fired a question off to DEC support.

Their suggestion was for a third machine on a third site purely to act 
as a cluster voting member.  And yes, they mentioned that a VS2000 would 
be up to the job.

Sidenote: In the event of something disastrous like a fire taking a 
whole building out, one of the directors asked the half serious question

"OK, either we lose our warehouse and all the stock in it or we lose all 
our offices and admin capability. Can the company survive either of 
those disasters?"

-- 
Paul Sture