l i n u x - u s e r s - g r o u p - o f - d a v i s
L U G O D
 
Next Meeting:
September 2: Social gathering
Next Installfest:
TBD
Latest News:
Aug. 18: Discounts to "Velocity" in NY; come to tonight's "Photography" talk
Page last updated:
2001 Dec 30 16:56

The following is an archive of a post made to our 'vox mailing list' by one of its subscribers.

Report this post as spam:

(Enter your email address)
Re: [vox] Uptime :) debate
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [vox] Uptime :) debate



On Thu, 20 December 2001, Don Werve wrote:

> 
> Not trying to belittle your acheivement; a seventy-four day uptime on
> an NT server under light load is pretty impressive.  But MS still 
> has a bit of a ways to go before they can touch Unix-like stability 
> numbers.
> 
> -- 
> Don Werve <donw@examen.com>
> Unix System Administrator

The uptime is not unusual for myself or a few of my friends.  I am new to my job at my present company, but I called a friend and he has had a NT server (PDC) that had 400 day uptime).  His Exchange server cluster has been up more than a year without necessary intervention.  He works for a company that has mission critical requirements.  I had a file sever serving personal directories and group directories that went 18 months without reboot until the power supply smoked.

The servers I have now are overpowered for their current load, but it's a new job and I didn't spec them.

I saw a Solaris box that had tremendous uptime, but was useless because components kept blowing up.  The system remained 'up' but was effectively useless as the apps people wanted to use wouldn't stay up.  Not my area, a former co-workers nightmare.

Also, until Linux, 'most' UNIX server platforms came with expensive hardware (BSD excepted).  This hardware was routinely tested for quality.  It also helps that many UNIX servers do not have the GUI overhead and when they do, the video component is not build into the kernel as is NT/2000.  (Which is why a bad video driver can absolutly kill an NT system).

I will also grant that UNIX's longer history has lead to a more stable platform for the most part, in addition to requiring a higher initial skillset to egt it to work at all.  With NT/2000, it appears that reading a book, anyone can configure a server (often badly) on off the shelf HW without consulting the HCL and it will still appear to work.  Probably with 'issues' leading to a reputation of instability.

I also believe that Linux will slowly continue to expand into the corporate envirnment, but that a serious desktop aceptance is still some years away.

Regards,
-sp


_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox


LinkedIn
LUGOD Group on LinkedIn
Sign up for LUGOD event announcements
Your email address:
facebook
LUGOD Group on Facebook
'Like' LUGOD on Facebook:

Hosting provided by:
Sunset Systems
Sunset Systems offers preconfigured Linux systems, remote system administration and custom software development.

LUGOD: Linux Users' Group of Davis
PO Box 2082, Davis, CA 95617
Contact Us

LUGOD is a 501(c)7 non-profit organization
based in Davis, California
and serving the Sacramento area.
"Linux" is a trademark of Linus Torvalds.

Sponsored in part by:
Sunset Systems
Who graciously hosts our website & mailing lists!