tu0 is set to auto-negotiate and it is connected to a HP2424 switch.
tu1 is set to 100Mb fixed half-duplex and is connected to a small hub which distributes the communication to three VXI sub-computers. This setting is prescribed by the equipment vendor.
Same setup vas used on the 4.0F machine.
The reason for this discussion is that we acquired the equipment with the 4.0F system about ten years ago, and we recently got the vendor support for an upgrade to 5.1B-4.
The transition went fine, except for the Xwin performance issue. There are a few other installations of this kind of equipment, and I know at least one where the upgrade to 5.1B-4 also caused noticeable degradation in Xwin performance.
We also have two DS10's which are NOT connected to any hardware and where we have the same software installed and when we do the same primitive test we see the same thing. Opening the one of the simplest applications in the vendor suite takes one second or less for the DS10 with 4.0F, and about 3 seconds for the DS10 with 5.1B.
Having said that, it should be mentioned that the test is performed using one of the the vendor's software products which probably is written for 4.0F. Could it be that the programming different for 4.0F and 5.1B to get the best performance?
However, "xterm" is coming up instantly from 4.0F, and maybe after 0.5-1 seconds from 5.1B, so I doubt this idea.
BN
