From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Apr 5 08:52:59 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id IAA24987 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 08:52:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from brasil.moneng.mei.com (brasil.moneng.mei.com [151.186.109.160]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA24968 Fri, 5 Apr 1996 08:52:49 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jgreco@localhost) by brasil.moneng.mei.com (8.7.Beta.1/8.7.Beta.1) id KAA04751; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 10:52:04 -0600 From: Joe Greco Message-Id: <199604051652.KAA04751@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Subject: Re: Recommendation Needed for server setup To: batie@agora.rdrop.com (Alan Batie) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 10:52:04 -0600 (CST) Cc: michael@memra.com, joel@quicklink.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Alan Batie" at Apr 4, 96 11:11:17 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > full news feeds demand a Pentium, other stuff works fine on a 486. > > I'm running a full newsfeed on a 486/66 and it's mostly idle. It's the > disk speed that makes the most difference. I would probably benefit from > upgrading to something I could put more memory in, particularly during > expires. If I had dozens or hundreds of clients, that would be required, > and a bigger cpu too, probably. Here I would typically agree, news.sol.net was a SP3G 486DX4/100 up until a month or two ago, I upgraded to a P90 because I got an excellent deal, not because it needed it. You really need RAM and I/O capacity more than CPU. Some other folks have been talking about 32MB of RAM. Well, maybe it was just me, but that did not cut it for me. Even at 48MB of RAM, with a 16MB history.pag file, expires were painful and performance suffered.. And if you're going to run Web stuff alongside it, I would really suggest that 64MB is minimal. > > There is only one email program for ISP's, namely sendmail. > > Unless you're concerned about security, then you run smail :-) Eh, security through obscurity? Nobody's yet explained to me why smail is more secure than Sendmail, beyond the fact that nobody really uses smail and therefore the security loopholes that it may offer do not get noticed as rapidly. > > Learn to build your own tools using PERL, > > it's a swiss-army knife. > > Absolutely critical! :-) ... Joe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Greco - Systems Administrator jgreco@ns.sol.net Solaria Public Access UNIX - Milwaukee, WI 414/546-7968