Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 15:41:57 +0100 From: Thomas Seck <tmseck-lists@netcologne.de> To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD Stability Message-ID: <20030104144157.GA485@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> In-Reply-To: <1041659893.9975.179.camel@zaphod.softweyr.com> References: <200212170023.gBH0Nvlu000764@beast.csl.sri.com> <20030103000232.GA52181@blazingdot.com> <Pine.GSO.4.51.0301021738490.19685@xmission.xmission.com> <20030103062708.GA426@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <20030103084232.GA3371@localhost.bsd.net.il> <20030103154323.GA454@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <1041659893.9975.179.camel@zaphod.softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Wes Peters (wes@softweyr.com):
> On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 15:43, Thomas Seck wrote:
> > * Nimrod Mesika (nimrod-me@bezeqint.net):
> >
> > > And uptimes are not important. Downtimes *are*.
> >
> > Yes. Especially the unscheduled ones.
>
> Don't be silly, uptimes are terribly important when they're not long
> enough to be useful. They're no longer important when they've gotten
> long enough to last between system upgrades, which FreeBSD and a number
> of other systems are regularly capable of these days.
You are over interpreting my message. Using publicly gathered uptimes as
a scale to measure 'stability' with is just nonsense, because you cannot
tell from the outside whether a 'low' uptime is due to stability issues
or due to good maintenance. Doing advocacy based on this is even
sillier.
Tell me: what is the maximum uptime one can achieve when following all
FreeBSD security advisories which involve loading a new kernel due to
locally or remotely exploitable kernel vulnerabilities?
> I remember people being mightily impressed with VAX/VMS systems being
> able to stay up for 30 days at a time. I also more recently recall
> system administrators being very disappointed by Windows NT servers
> because they couldn't stay up for 6 days at a time and they had NO time
> in their schedule when the machines could be rebooted without disrupting
> workflow between 0400 Monday and 0400 Saturday.
Well, I our NT servers did not BSOD on us for years now. What does this
say about NT stability? Right, nothing. The only downtimes we see here
are the scheduled ones. I want it to stay that way.
Too many people try to squeeze advocacy out of every figure they see
somewhere. I don't.
--Thomas
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030104144157.GA485>