From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 3 15:23:57 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC4716A4FB for ; Fri, 3 Sep 2004 15:23:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns1.tiadon.com (SMTP.tiadon.com [69.27.132.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F29F643D1D for ; Fri, 3 Sep 2004 15:23:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from [69.27.131.0] ([69.27.131.0]) by ns1.tiadon.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:20:43 -0500 Message-ID: <41388C8A.6090702@daleco.biz> Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 10:23:54 -0500 From: "Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040712 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Huff References: <8F6BD2D2-FD85-11D8-8EBC-000D93511A6A@hhbb.co.uk> <41387C64.2090304@daleco.biz> <16696.34812.14794.392474@jerusalem.litteratus.org> In-Reply-To: <16696.34812.14794.392474@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Sep 2004 15:20:44.0483 (UTC) FILETIME=[94D7A130:01C491C9] cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Way OT: How long does your box run for? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 15:23:57 -0000 Robert Huff wrote: >Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P. writes: > > > >> IIRC, Netcraft now claims that most >> new FreeBSD builds "reset" to zero after 400-something days, so >> some of their statistics may be no longer as valid... >> >> > > From the NetCraft FAQ: > >Why do some Operating Systems never show uptimes above 497 days ? > > The method that Netcraft uses to determine the uptime of a > server is bounded by an upper limit of 497 days for some > Operating Systems (see above). It is therefore not possible to > see uptimes for these systems that go beyond this upper > limit. Although we could in theory attempt to compute the true > uptime for OS's with this upper limit by monitoring for > restarts at the expected time, we prefer not to do this as it > can be inaccurate and error prone. > > ... which is not exactly the same thing. > > Point taken. Typing faster than thinking is dangerous; particularly when not looking at the datum to which one is referring. Thank you. KDK