I love Linux
-
I hate MySQL and use PostgreSQL, and I have my doubts that Linux is to blame for it's failure. Jeremy Falcon wrote: What kind of stress is this machine under? Not too great, but a lot of financial services companies, and internet conglomerates like EBay, Amazon.com, Google, all use Linux. Those loads aren't light.
Martin Marvinski wrote: like EBay, Amazon.com, Google, all use Linux. Those loads aren't light. EBay works as a ISAPI extension, which means that it is Windows NT/2k, at least front-end. I vote pro drink :beer:
-
I hate MySQL and use PostgreSQL, and I have my doubts that Linux is to blame for it's failure. Jeremy Falcon wrote: What kind of stress is this machine under? Not too great, but a lot of financial services companies, and internet conglomerates like EBay, Amazon.com, Google, all use Linux. Those loads aren't light.
Martin Marvinski wrote: and I have my doubts that Linux is to blame for it's failure. Then I suggest you study more. Jeremy Falcon Imputek
-
I hate MySQL and use PostgreSQL, and I have my doubts that Linux is to blame for it's failure. Jeremy Falcon wrote: What kind of stress is this machine under? Not too great, but a lot of financial services companies, and internet conglomerates like EBay, Amazon.com, Google, all use Linux. Those loads aren't light.
Martin Marvinski wrote: Google Google (uses Linux): http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode\_u=off&mode\_w=on&site=www.google.com Yahoo! (uses FreeBSD): http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode\_u=on&mode\_w=on&site=www.yahoo.com Do I have to explain what the inconsistency means in the charts? Jeremy Falcon Imputek
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: like EBay, Amazon.com, Google, all use Linux. Those loads aren't light. EBay works as a ISAPI extension, which means that it is Windows NT/2k, at least front-end. I vote pro drink :beer:
Most famous website which used Linux is this. Do you see the irony?
-
Most famous website which used Linux is this. Do you see the irony?
I also don't have the money right now to afford the kind of bandwidth on my own that I get from these people. It's not my choice. If I find a better host on FreeBSD I guarantee you I'll switch. Jeremy Falcon Imputek
-
I also don't have the money right now to afford the kind of bandwidth on my own that I get from these people. It's not my choice. If I find a better host on FreeBSD I guarantee you I'll switch. Jeremy Falcon Imputek
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Somehow my HTML tags screwed up the lounge and showed your website name instead of the one I provided. I basically ate your post. Look at the post again.
-
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Somehow my HTML tags screwed up the lounge and showed your website name instead of the one I provided. I basically ate your post. Look at the post again.
LOL! Must've been some of that hackor HTML no one talks about. :) Jeremy Falcon Imputek
-
Hey, since everyone seems to be talking about Linux. Can I get some ideas from from the programmer people about Lindows (the new Os)? Thanx
The idea sounds cool, but I haven't used it or studied it. So, I don't know jack about it. Jeremy Falcon Imputek
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Google Google (uses Linux): http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode\_u=off&mode\_w=on&site=www.google.com Yahoo! (uses FreeBSD): http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode\_u=on&mode\_w=on&site=www.yahoo.com Do I have to explain what the inconsistency means in the charts? Jeremy Falcon Imputek
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Do I have to explain what the inconsistency means in the charts? Dude, you need to read the charts a little better. The scale is different on both, and it turns out google has better uptimes. The max for yahoo was 64.59 days and the max for google and linux was 171.72 days. All the other results for google such as latest uptime were almost double yahoo's.
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: like EBay, Amazon.com, Google, all use Linux. Those loads aren't light. EBay works as a ISAPI extension, which means that it is Windows NT/2k, at least front-end. I vote pro drink :beer:
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: EBay works as a ISAPI extension, which means that it is Windows NT/2k, at least front-end I think that the search facility etc. actually runs Zeus webserver -- which includes support for ISAPI extensions. I might be wrong (don't remember where I saw this).
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Google Google (uses Linux): http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode\_u=off&mode\_w=on&site=www.google.com Yahoo! (uses FreeBSD): http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode\_u=on&mode\_w=on&site=www.yahoo.com Do I have to explain what the inconsistency means in the charts? Jeremy Falcon Imputek
-
Hey, since everyone seems to be talking about Linux. Can I get some ideas from from the programmer people about Lindows (the new Os)? Thanx
I think its good someone's done it, but it pretty much undermines the whole benefit of Linux. A single Company develops its own customised version of Linux which supports (some) Windows apps, most importantly Office etc. Presumably, this is to offer consumers choice. However, the support from native Windows apps could be broken in the future and thus their support on Lindows is hindered. Not only this, but one of the biggest benefits of running Linux is that its open source, and so as soon as a problem is found, it can be fixed. Not only that, but improvements to the O/S can be shared across all the various distributions. Since Lindows is not gonna release their source code to enable support for Windows apps (otherwise, it would never stand to make any cash) it appears to have a few conflicts of interest (in my opinion). I'm not anti-Linux (and in fact have a Linux server sitting here at home), and do admire it for some things. However, I don't see how another piece of propietary software is going to revolutionise the industry. It may make things better for those considering to roll out Linux across the enterprise, but even then you're still tied into a specific Company, and is that Company likely to have the same level of support to Corporate clients? They'd need a huge amount of investment etc. Anyway, those are my few doubts about it. Great idea, be interesting to see how it pans out, although I'm being a little skeptical.
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Do I have to explain what the inconsistency means in the charts? Dude, you need to read the charts a little better. The scale is different on both, and it turns out google has better uptimes. The max for yahoo was 64.59 days and the max for google and linux was 171.72 days. All the other results for google such as latest uptime were almost double yahoo's.
Martin Marvinski wrote: Dude, you need to read the charts a little better. No, you do. I'm not concerned with uptime; I'm talking about the response time during the times it was up. And, just because a server is rebooted doesn't mean anything bad. Maybe they upgraded. Wow, what a concept. Jeremy Falcon Imputek
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Dude, you need to read the charts a little better. No, you do. I'm not concerned with uptime; I'm talking about the response time during the times it was up. And, just because a server is rebooted doesn't mean anything bad. Maybe they upgraded. Wow, what a concept. Jeremy Falcon Imputek
Jeremy Falcon wrote: And, just because a server is rebooted doesn't mean anything bad. Then why do Sun, HP, Microsoft, and others always brag about five nines uptime? Surely it must mean somthing?