3 Jun
2004
3 Jun
'04
3:37 p.m.
On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 08:11:54PM -0700, Zane H. Healy wrote:
Exactly... I used to run production stuff on an 11/750 w/8MB and a uVAX-II
w/16 MB (VMS 4.x and VMS 5.x). At home, my "largest" VAX is an 8300 with
about 18MB, running VMS 6.x.
Now I know that VMS 6 and up have larger memory requirements, but I can't
imagine an Alpha OpenVMS machine with less than 128MB being useful, unlike
a VAX. I still like the Alpha, but it gobbles RAM chips for breakfast.
-ethan
--
Ethan Dicks, A-130-S Current South Pole Weather at 04-Jun-2004 03:30 Z
South Pole Station
PSC 468 Box 400 Temp -84.9 F (-65.0 C) Windchill -108.2 F (-77.90 C)
APO AP 96598 Wind 3.7 kts Grid 077 Barometer 660.9 mb (11355. ft)
Ethan.Dicks(a)amanda.spole.gov http://penguincentral.com/penguincentral.html
Depending on
what you are doing you don't necessarily need an enormous
amount of physical memory on an Alpha to run VMS.
In part it depends on how you define "Enormous Amounts", based on my
experience the minimum to run OpenVMS on Alpha is 112MB, and on a VAX that
would be an "Enormous Amount". Of course my main system is currently
running with 640MB RAM and sitting at 42% used.