'As for "keeping a log", that is a similar over-simplification. The reference is to "journal file system" a.k.a. a logging file system. This will probably get fixed in Linux within six months, but is currently a definite negative (long fsck times for large storage systems) and just one example of the many criteria we examined in our report.'
I agree 100%. I've spent about 5 years total contracting in and out of IBM Austin's RS/6000 divisions (AIX defect support, CPU stress test, and some early web development) and was very impressed with every department I spent time with.
In the hardware labs (back in '91) I was like a kid in a candy store; the early 320, 520 and 530 was rolling through and at the time were sweet boxes. I think the processor planar on the 320 ran at 37mhz, but smoked 100mhz Pentiums in floating point and integer.
The data path between the CPU/data/instruction cache were a whopping 288 bits (on the ancient 340s).
Way back in '91 they were working on a split transaction crossbar buss for the upcoming SMP systems which I think turned into the J30.
Throw AIX in the mix with all its cool features and you have a nice rock solid system.
Oh well, back to reality. We have found CommuniGate to be a Very robust IMAP/POP3 server. Current message store is about 100MB on a 26GIG MylexRAID on RedHat 5.2. Needs rebooting about every month (not close to our Solaris boxes who run many, many months) because of some strange problem. Check out:
http://www.stalker.com/CommuniGatePro/
I think it even has cluster support these days that can scale up to 1,000,000 boxes...
Prior to CommuniGate we used NT and Netscape Messenger. This was a total nightmare. We regularly lost the IMAP folers and had to bring all mail local via POP3 and re-upload to fix. The server ran reliably enough, but there were terrible and frightful problems with the message store.
Since moving to Linux and Communigate 98% of all our mail server problems are over.
Heh, no way. I *do not* trust MS at all. Read through some of the DOJ court transcripts. They'll make you feel good to run Win98. It is not about getting paid, but who is doing the paying. They wield their money like a sword...after all they are the richest corporation on the planet. They have the financial power (funded through a monopoly) to suck in Perl and most of the open source movement. Just you wait and see, the war has only just begun. See 'ya, Jim
0) Tsk tsk on those of you who believe everything Microsoft say. When they said they were paying Activestate to make Perl work better on NT, you forgot to translate that back into honest English: they're paying Activestate to implement fork() on NT so that NT can become more like Unix (a slower buggier more crashprone Unix). Yes, Microsoft for "bring up to baseline of minimum acceptable functionality" is "make it work better". Another way of saying this is "make NT suck less for Perl users". Perl is all about making your OS suck less.
Yeah, yea. Don't you see? It is the the first step. Sure they are Paying--that is what it all about. Sure, so NT becomes more like UNIX...you nailed it on that one.
Sure, make DHTML 'work better'. Make 'Java' work better. 'Decommotize' [sic] common protocols so they work better.
Hi Tom, I know you from your work and respect you highly. But, you have to admit, to let MS issue press releases with ActiveState, to have them state they are 'helping' Perl, to let the 'point man' work for the company who just got infused with big MS-dollars has to be unsettling those who are not in the 'know'.
History tells us they will embrace and extend. Can you tell me that you will 100% be here in 5 years along with the current anti-MS sentiment to fully defend Perl? Probably not. Once those who have 'been there done that' have gone away, MS and their infiltrators will be the only ones standing. They will be standing with $$$ in the pockets.
You see, it is all about money (or drugs). MS has the *huge* financial backing to undermine Perl.
Not today? Maybe not. In six months? Maybe not, but they will be much closer. In one year, maybe not, but 1/2 way there.
'I haCk b/c I loVe It' will only last so long. what you say now won't hold up for long.
Just mark my words.
Sorry,
Jim
PS - I'll bet you $50 that the name "Tom Christian" is on some big 'ToDo' list up in Seattle.
Are you saying we should trust anyone funded by MS?
*Never* trust anyone funded by MS or MS them selves.
They are the devil.
Jim
Beginning of the END!!!
on
On Perl 5.6
·
· Score: 0
Man, I'm seeing the writing on the wall. This Gurusamy Sarathy dude is releasing the next version of perl. He also works for ActiveState who just took big bucks from MS to make sure Perl works well on Windows. Next thing you know it will me MSPerl. WTF? Now will we have MS lining the pockets of the Apache developers?
Calling me ParaNoid?? Don't think so, just look back on the 'head-fakes' that were put on OS/2 and Lotus.
Please don't go to Austin. It blows! 6th street is lame, music 24x7 is terrible, all the micro brewries make bad beer, cable modems and DLS here are slower than 14.4kb/s, the lake is polluted, barton springs is no longer flowing, the greenbelt is now has no trees, IBM, Tivoli, Vignette, Garden.com, drkoop.com, PenComm Systems, AMD, Trilogy, pcorder.com, and Dell vired all employees and moved to NYC.
- Any reasoning on why these features were removed. Maybe b/c of the whole Netscape thing?
- Valid reasoning why SSI are no longer needed in a web server environment, you just say the are 1994 technology. Blah...whatever.
- Valid reasoning why there is no easy upgrade path, every time I upgrade Apache it is pretty much a no brainer. Any other web server I've ever upgraded needs very little tweaking to upgrade.
- I don't see how removing the web based admin is a 'huge leap' forward in usibility and was only useful back in, say 1994. Whatever...
If that is all you have to say about why these features were removed then just keep quiet:o) Your posts have been useless....
Server-side includes are simply the wrong way to publish web content when you have ADP's, which give you Tcl scripting right in your web page. Once more, if you still cry for SSI's, you're clueless.
What? Hmm, silly me, would have never though I would have to convert all my exising HTML pages to some TCL (I hate TCL) based stuff. Why not leave in SSIs? I can hardly think of a web server that does not support SSI.
If you pine for web-based administration, it's time to get with the program. The control port interface gives you extensive control that you just can't achieve on web pages.
Aw come on, I've see some nice web admins, besides this is no excuse for removing what was there. Why not give a 'simpleton' web based admin and then let the hackers work with the new and improved TCL based config file for the nitty-gritty config?
And, of course, the rest of the missing features of 2.3 can be re-implemented by anyone
Yeeessss, but why reinvent the wheel? They were already present, tested and working.
I pray 2.3 will be around for a while b/c it is IMPOSSIBLE for me to upgrade to 3.0 without a TON of work. I might as well convert to thttpd or some other threads based web server.
No doubt! AIX rules. JFS, LVM, SMIT, ODM, 64bit, solid as a Mac truck. I used to work in AIX defect support in Austin, was my 1st UNIX to play with. Jaded form the get go? Yes, but I've never seen a better UNIX in my years of playing with Solaris, DGUX, Linux, FreeBSD, SCO....
1) lame config file format. a full regular expression engine would be faster, and easier to use
Pay the $$$ and get the web interface. Quite nice, or, if you are cheap buy the O'Reilly book, RTFM, etc, etc. You will not find a more featured MTU at a cheaper price.
2) *NOT SCALABLE* Period. Every webmail provider who tried to go with the sendmail approach got hammered. Commercial alternatives like SIMS, Post.office, or IsoCor are much more scalable, into the millions or 10s of millions.
Yeah, and they didn't download any one of those mail systems and use it at no cost. I'll bet you any large scale ISP pays over $30k for their mail/POP/IMAP servers.
3) buggy as hell. Sendmail is single handedly responsible for more rooting than any other Unix app. Not just buffer overflows either.
Maybe in the past, but not lately. Sendmail, properly configured, is rathter tight these days. Generally it is the admin to blame.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm, I'll bet you compsed this note from a MS product then cut-n-past into ./?
Wanna guess how I know?
Jim
I get lots of coldfusion errors.
Something about a templage on E:\
Ikes!
Jim
The install smokes debian.
Jim
Chew on this D.H. Brown.
'As for "keeping a log", that is a similar over-simplification. The reference is to "journal file system" a.k.a. a logging file system. This will probably get fixed in Linux within six months, but is currently a definite negative (long fsck times for large storage systems) and just one example of the many criteria we examined in our report.'
I suppose Linux will move up a notch?
It will in my book.
Jim
I highly recommend buying and installing Caldera's OpenLinux 2.2. If you are looking to pass around a distro to your WinXX friends, this one is it.
My friends have been completely blown away.
It has 100% graphical install and 100% graphical boot. Personally, I would rate the install a 10, NT a 4, RedHat 6.0 a 3 and Win95/98 a 8.
See: http://www.calderasystems.com
Jim
Yes, but I can stick a SCSI tape drive on the back of a running AIX box, run 'cfgmgr' and then use said tape drive.
Jim
I agree 100%. I've spent about 5 years total contracting in and out of IBM Austin's RS/6000 divisions (AIX defect support, CPU stress test, and some early web development) and was very impressed with every department I spent time with.
In the hardware labs (back in '91) I was like a kid in a candy store; the early 320, 520 and 530 was rolling through and at the time were sweet boxes. I think the processor planar on the 320 ran at 37mhz, but smoked 100mhz Pentiums in floating point and integer.
The data path between the CPU/data/instruction cache were a whopping 288 bits (on the ancient 340s).
Way back in '91 they were working on a split transaction crossbar buss for the upcoming SMP systems which I think turned into the J30.
Throw AIX in the mix with all its cool features and you have a nice rock solid system.
Jim
No doubt, but most whiners don't code and want something for free.
They are *nothing* like the Dell-does, just slapping Linux on a box without any donating anything to the fundamental Linux infrastructure.
SGI is supporting (largely) SAMBA, will be donating a journled filesystem, and probably lots of cool 3D stuff.
Mij
Oh shit, thats funny....
Jim
Oh man, very nice:
http://www.sun.com/sims/performance/index.jhtml
http://www.sun.com/sims/performance/shiloh.jhtml
Probably a $1M box.
Oh well, back to reality. We have found CommuniGate to be a Very robust IMAP/POP3 server. Current message store is about 100MB on a 26GIG MylexRAID on RedHat 5.2. Needs rebooting about every month (not close to our Solaris boxes who run many, many months) because of some strange problem. Check out:
http://www.stalker.com/CommuniGatePro/
I think it even has cluster support these days that can scale up to 1,000,000 boxes...
Prior to CommuniGate we used NT and Netscape Messenger. This was a total nightmare. We regularly lost the IMAP folers and had to bring all mail local via POP3 and re-upload to fix. The server ran reliably enough, but there were terrible and frightful problems with the message store.
Since moving to Linux and Communigate 98% of all our mail server problems are over.
Laters,
Mij
A good Language is more powerful than an OS.
Wrong! What about Java? MS's version of Java would be a non-threat had it NOT been bundled with millions of copies of Win98.
Heh, no way. I *do not* trust MS at all. Read through some of the DOJ court transcripts. They'll make you feel good to run Win98. It is not about getting paid, but who is doing the paying. They wield their money like a sword...after all they are the richest corporation on the planet. They have the financial power (funded through a monopoly) to suck in Perl and most of the open source movement. Just you wait and see, the war has only just begun. See 'ya, Jim
paying Activestate to make Perl work better on NT, you forgot to translate that back into
honest English: they're paying Activestate to implement fork() on NT so that NT can become
more like Unix (a slower buggier more crashprone Unix). Yes, Microsoft for "bring up to
baseline of minimum acceptable functionality" is "make it work better". Another way of saying
this is "make NT suck less for Perl users". Perl is all about making your OS suck less.
Yeah, yea. Don't you see? It is the the first step. Sure they are Paying--that is what it all about. Sure, so NT becomes more like UNIX...you nailed it on that one.
Sure, make DHTML 'work better'. Make 'Java' work better. 'Decommotize' [sic] common protocols so they work better.
Come on, you *cannot* ignore history.
Do not be fooled. It is almost too late.
Jim
Hi Tom, I know you from your work and respect you highly. But, you have to admit, to let MS issue press releases with ActiveState, to have them state they are 'helping' Perl, to let the 'point man' work for the company who just got infused with big MS-dollars has to be unsettling those who are not in the 'know'.
History tells us they will embrace and extend. Can you tell me that you will 100% be here in 5 years along with the current anti-MS sentiment to fully defend Perl? Probably not. Once those who have 'been there done that' have gone away, MS and their infiltrators will be the only ones standing.
They will be standing with $$$ in the pockets.
You see, it is all about money (or drugs). MS has the *huge* financial backing to undermine Perl.
Not today? Maybe not. In six months? Maybe not, but they will be much closer. In one year, maybe not, but 1/2 way there.
'I haCk b/c I loVe It' will only last so long. what you say now won't hold up for long.
Just mark my words.
Sorry,
Jim
PS - I'll bet you $50 that the name "Tom Christian" is on some big 'ToDo' list up in Seattle.
Yeah, pre-date, post-date, whatever.
Are you saying we should trust these people?
Are you saying we should trust anyone funded by MS?
*Never* trust anyone funded by MS or MS them selves.
They are the devil.
Jim
Man, I'm seeing the writing on the wall. This
Gurusamy Sarathy dude is releasing the next
version of perl. He also works for ActiveState
who just took big bucks from MS to make sure
Perl works well on Windows. Next thing you know
it will me MSPerl. WTF? Now will we have MS
lining the pockets of the Apache developers?
Calling me ParaNoid?? Don't think so, just look back on the 'head-fakes' that were put on OS/2 and Lotus.
Be smart. Don't be a fool.
Jim
Please don't go to Austin. It blows! 6th street is lame, music 24x7 is terrible, all the micro brewries make bad beer, cable modems and DLS here are slower than 14.4kb/s, the lake is polluted, barton springs is no longer flowing, the greenbelt is now has no trees, IBM, Tivoli, Vignette, Garden.com, drkoop.com, PenComm Systems, AMD, Trilogy, pcorder.com, and Dell vired all employees and moved to NYC.
So there, no good reason to move to Austin!
Jim
Whatever, you still have not produced:
:o) Your posts have been useless....
- Any reasoning on why these features were removed. Maybe b/c of the whole Netscape thing?
- Valid reasoning why SSI are no longer needed in a web server environment, you just say the are 1994 technology. Blah...whatever.
- Valid reasoning why there is no easy upgrade path, every time I upgrade Apache it is pretty much a no brainer. Any other web server I've ever upgraded needs very little tweaking to upgrade.
- I don't see how removing the web based admin is a 'huge leap' forward in usibility and was only useful back in, say 1994. Whatever...
If that is all you have to say about why these features were removed then just keep quiet
BTW, I can code in TCL and it sucks.
Jim 'who cannot speel'
What? Hmm, silly me, would have never though I would have to convert all my exising HTML pages to some TCL (I hate TCL) based stuff. Why not leave in SSIs? I can hardly think of a web server that does not support SSI.
If you pine for web-based administration, it's time to get with the program. The control port interface gives you extensive control that you just can't achieve on web pages.
Aw come on, I've see some nice web admins, besides this is no excuse for removing what was there. Why not give a 'simpleton' web based admin and then let the hackers work with the new and improved TCL based config file for the nitty-gritty config?
And, of course, the rest of the missing features of 2.3 can be re-implemented by anyone
Yeeessss, but why reinvent the wheel? They were already present, tested and working.
I pray 2.3 will be around for a while b/c it is IMPOSSIBLE for me to upgrade to 3.0 without a TON of work. I might as well convert to thttpd or some other threads based web server.
Jim
You must remember AOL probably serves up more web hits in a day than anyone.
Jim
We really like the 2.3 version, nice fast multi-threaded server. Web based admin (nuked in 3.0) was really slick, very configurable server.
We serve over 1.5M hits per day with ease, never taking more than 8% CPU or more than 12M of RAM. Sometimes we'll take 25-35 hits per sec....
Unfortunately no mod_perl/velocigen backend, seems to lean towards TCL.
Jim
No doubt! AIX rules. JFS, LVM, SMIT, ODM, 64bit, solid as a Mac truck. I used to work in AIX defect support in Austin, was my 1st UNIX to play with. Jaded form the get go? Yes, but I've never seen a better UNIX in my years of playing with Solaris, DGUX, Linux, FreeBSD, SCO....
See 'ya,
Jim
Damn, that was beautiful!
Jim
Pay the $$$ and get the web interface. Quite nice, or, if you are cheap buy the O'Reilly book, RTFM, etc, etc. You will not find a more featured MTU at a cheaper price.
2) *NOT SCALABLE* Period. Every webmail provider who tried to go with the sendmail approach got hammered. Commercial alternatives like SIMS, Post.office, or IsoCor are much more scalable, into the millions or 10s of millions.
Yeah, and they didn't download any one of those mail systems and use it at no cost. I'll bet you any large scale ISP pays over $30k for their mail/POP/IMAP servers.
3) buggy as hell. Sendmail is single handedly responsible for more rooting than any other Unix app. Not just buffer overflows either.
Maybe in the past, but not lately. Sendmail, properly configured, is rathter tight these days. Generally it is the admin to blame.
Laters...
See http://dls.jump.net
Just got 1.54/384k personal for $200 per mo.
You can get 384k/128k for $69 per mo (comes with a few dhcp addrs and 5gig per/mo).
Over and out,
Jim