> Maybe we should try to port netperf > (www.netperf.org) to Windows and add raw > Ethernet to it.
netperf allready runs on Win32, I've tested it on both 95 and NT. The netperf ftp site has binaries for Intel and Alpha.
Neither 95 nor NT has any problem saturating a 10Mbps ethernet, but at higher speeds NT kicks the snot out of 95 on the same h/w. I've seen NT get 90+Mbps on a 100Mbps ethernet, but don't have anything faster to test with.
The loopback tests show that Linux and FreeBSD have comparable maximum speeds, much higher then NT (on the same h/w). One assumes that this has to do with how often stuff is moved around in memory, etc. etc.
BTW, if you ever want to convince yourself that ISA sucks, just run some tests on a PCI NIC and then an ISA NIC, and watch the 60-80% increase in CPU use for the ISA card.
You're correct, the US is thought of as being the land of litigation and the home of the frivolous lawsuit.
I can't speak for.uk but in.ca when a lawsuits goes to court, the settlement (if any) is decided by the judge, not a jury. Judges are pretty conservative about this, we rarely see multi-million dollar awards up here in the frozen north.
>Why cant they make a wake on lan printer? That >would help in energy savings. heres what I have >been planning on doing for some time:
>I am going to make a print filter for my printer >that signals an X10 module attached to my printer >so that the printer turns on when a print job is >sent. Then, after a few minutes, the printer >turns off also.
Most decent modern laser printers go into energy saving mode if they're idle for too long. (Just like modern photocopiers.) When someone starts printing, the printer takes a few seconds to warm up, then prints the job.
Many HP printers have this feature, I'm sure that other products do this as well.
>Can anyone list lots of reasons for Oracle being >bad on Novell:) - how does Novell/Oracle compare >to Oracle on NT, Linux, Solaris, Irix or HP-UX?
NetWare is, for lack of a better term, wierd. That's not an insult, I happen to really like NW, but it's important to understand that NetWare 2.x/3.x/4.x isn't a general purpose OS. It was designed to be a low overhead file server, so it doesn't have some of the features that you'd expect in a "normal" OS.
1) No virtual memory. In a normal NW server, 80% of your memory is used as a filesystem cache, so I don't need virtual memory. On a database server, this is bad, i.e. if I run a very large query and run out of memory, my query aborts. In practice, you don't want your db server to spend a whole lot of time swapping, but it's preferable for the occasional big query to swap a bit then to abort.
2) As another poster mentioned, there is no memory protection in NW. The idea was to design a speedy file server, which would only be running a handful of processes. This means that one bad driver or NLM can take down the whole server. In practice, a NW admin is very careful, and tests new NLMs before they load them on a production server.
Was this post contributed by 1000 monkeys, or just one?
Tough Crowd - s/w costs are (relatively) minor
on
Linux on CNN
·
· Score: 1
>The bit about costs is valid, consider the price >of the computer, operating room and, most of all, >IT personnel and the difference between 0 and a >thousand dollars is quite insignificant.
Very good point. Maybe we should try to fill in some details, i.e. most of the folks here don't run big server farms for a living.
To run an office of a decent size, you should have the following server room facilities:
decent air conditioning
adequate UPS (i.e. a big centralized etworked one, not some cheap little 400VA thing)
raised flooring (ideally)
a few 100Mb hubs
CAT5 wiring and patch panels (certified, of course!)
backup device - DAT for about $8K, or DLT at about $15K. If you're got big backup requirements, you need an autochanger, so add another $5K or $10K.
server hardware - starting at $20K for a low end brand name server, and up up up from there.
In an environment like this, another few grand for the OS isn't a show stopper. That's why Solaris and SCO and AIX and HPUX etc haven't been blown away by the various free *nix's.
Don't confuse the Linux workstation/firewall/router in your apartment with the email server for 10,000 people, these are two totally different worlds with totally different rules.
In big shops, folks have been moving to Free Software/Open Source because it works, not because they save a handfull of $$$ on server licenses.
Keep. If folks don't like him, they can filter him
on
Feature:Distortions
·
· Score: 1
As subject says. Let him say his thing, if folks don't like it, it's trivial to screen him out.
Here's a good idea for a./ poll... How many of you just created an account solely for the purpose of filtering Katz?
Slashdot Mirror
> Maybe we should try to port netperf
> (www.netperf.org) to Windows and add raw
> Ethernet to it.
netperf allready runs on Win32, I've tested it on both 95 and NT. The netperf ftp site has binaries for Intel and Alpha.
Neither 95 nor NT has any problem saturating a 10Mbps ethernet, but at higher speeds NT kicks the snot out of 95 on the same h/w. I've seen NT get 90+Mbps on a 100Mbps ethernet, but don't have anything faster to test with.
The loopback tests show that Linux and FreeBSD have comparable maximum speeds, much higher then NT (on the same h/w). One assumes that this has to do with how often stuff is moved around in memory, etc. etc.
BTW, if you ever want to convince yourself that ISA sucks, just run some tests on a PCI NIC and then an ISA NIC, and watch the 60-80% increase in CPU use for the ISA card.
You're correct, the US is thought of as being the land of litigation and the home of the frivolous lawsuit.
.uk but in .ca when a lawsuits goes to court, the settlement (if any) is decided by the judge, not a jury. Judges are pretty conservative about this, we rarely see multi-million dollar awards up here in the frozen north.
I can't speak for
(BTW, IANAL, but my GF IAL)
>Why cant they make a wake on lan printer? That
>would help in energy savings. heres what I have
>been planning on doing for some time:
>I am going to make a print filter for my printer
>that signals an X10 module attached to my printer
>so that the printer turns on when a print job is
>sent. Then, after a few minutes, the printer
>turns off also.
Most decent modern laser printers go into energy saving mode if they're idle for too long. (Just like modern photocopiers.) When someone starts printing, the printer takes a few seconds to warm up, then prints the job.
Many HP printers have this feature, I'm sure that other products do this as well.
>Can anyone list lots of reasons for Oracle being :) - how does Novell/Oracle compare
>bad on Novell
>to Oracle on NT, Linux, Solaris, Irix or HP-UX?
NetWare is, for lack of a better term, wierd. That's not an insult, I happen to really like NW, but it's important to understand that NetWare 2.x/3.x/4.x isn't a general purpose OS. It was designed to be a low overhead file server, so it doesn't have some of the features that you'd expect in a "normal" OS.
1) No virtual memory. In a normal NW server, 80% of your memory is used as a filesystem cache, so I don't need virtual memory. On a database server, this is bad, i.e. if I run a very large query and run out of memory, my query aborts. In practice, you don't want your db server to spend a whole lot of time swapping, but it's preferable for the occasional big query to swap a bit then to abort.
2) As another poster mentioned, there is no memory protection in NW. The idea was to design a speedy file server, which would only be running a handful of processes. This means that one bad driver or NLM can take down the whole server. In practice, a NW admin is very careful, and tests new NLMs before they load them on a production server.
Was this post contributed by 1000 monkeys, or just one?
>of the computer, operating room and, most of all,
>IT personnel and the difference between 0 and a
>thousand dollars is quite insignificant.
Very good point. Maybe we should try to fill in some details, i.e. most of the folks here don't run big server farms for a living.
To run an office of a decent size, you should have the following server room facilities:
In an environment like this, another few grand for the OS isn't a show stopper. That's why Solaris and SCO and AIX and HPUX etc haven't been blown away by the various free *nix's.
Don't confuse the Linux workstation/firewall/router in your apartment with the email server for 10,000 people, these are two totally different worlds with totally different rules.
In big shops, folks have been moving to Free Software/Open Source because it works, not because they save a handfull of $$$ on server licenses.
As subject says. Let him say his thing, if folks don't like it, it's trivial to screen him out.
./ poll... How many of you just created an account solely for the purpose of filtering Katz?
Here's a good idea for a
(raises hand)