From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 28 14:05:14 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCED516A4B3 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fubar.adept.org (fubar.adept.org [63.147.172.249]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5ACF44001 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@adept.org) Received: by fubar.adept.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id BACD81522D; Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fubar.adept.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B60D915227 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Mike Hoskins To: advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20030928212728.GA7348@pasternak.w.lub.pl> Message-ID: <20030928135649.T92057@fubar.adept.org> References: <200309282117.01642.avleeuwen@piwebs.com> <20030928212728.GA7348@pasternak.w.lub.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: Slashdot rejects "BSD is NOT dying" article X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:05:14 -0000 On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, Michal Pasternak wrote: > Everyone should also check > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/09/01/most_reliable_and_fastest_hosting_company_sites_during_august.html that's great and all, but let's face it... even as a loyal BSD bigot, i know a lot of those uptime numbers are also related to the fact that many companies have "load balancers" with large server farms... so "detecting a failure" isn't quite what it sounds like. (BTW, i just checked and ~3-4 out of the top 10 sites with the highest uptimes were BSD; one Linux, one Win2k, one Solaris 8... the stats change a lot.) but we all know that... and the netcraft results are interesting nonetheless. i think too many people become obsessed with uptime though. i can load a desktop machine with just about any OS but Windows, stick it in a colo, have it do very little, and it'll have "high uptime". what does that mean really? nothing. it may look good on netcraft stats pages, but that's about it. i think most real sysadmins are focussed more on overall stability (which certainly ties into uptime), security and ease of management a lot more than uptime alone. after all, in today's world, if you're following a sane patch/test/deploy schedule for your production site, uptimes for individual boxes will likely be limited to 1-3 months (that's my experience with BSD, Linux, Solaris and Windoze). it is funny though... you'd think slashdot rumor mill types would at least try to start rumors that aren't so easily disproven by well known and reasonably trusted sites. -mrh -- From: "Spam Catcher" To: spam-catcher@adept.org Do NOT send email to the address listed above or you will be added to a blacklist!