Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:59:43 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: Colin Percival <colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk> Cc: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> Subject: Re: Good BSD/Linux Article (somewhat off-topic) Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040117185613.22159B-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.1.20040116175159.03f4dd48@imap.sfu.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Colin Percival wrote: > At 16:18 16/01/2004, Jamie Bowden wrote: > >I read it from the link off of Daemon News' Daily section. If someone > >wants to /. it, you'll probably need to upgrade your connection for a few > >days, and add filters to your mail to screen the nastygrams you'll be sure > >to get from the shallow (and usually 14yo) end of the Linux Userbase Pool. > > I think the /. effect is overrated these days. Network connections > and processors have gotten faster much more rapidly than the slashdot > readership has grown; the only time slashdot kills anything now is when > people use excessively dynamic pages. My experience is much the same -- I've had various web sites I hosted slashdotted on various occasions, and for a long time I hosted them on a p120 on a small fraction of a T1 without any problem. Of course, I don't use dynamic content, and it seems like the people who really have the problems are the people using a lot of CGI scripts with perl on their front page :-). I suspect that the /. effect has gotten easier to carry over time in part because a lot of the clients are higher bandwidth than they were before -- if you have moderate size files being tranfered, lots of long-lived slow connections take up a lot more memory than short-lived ones. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040117185613.22159B-100000>