Which is why this is not a left/right issue. The right currently doesn't want to regulate the internet, we should all want that. The left currently wants to regulate the internet and impose restrictions on it, do not want! The fact that people trust the FCC to regulate the internet when the same people don't want the FCC regulating TV/Radio is what makes this whole issue so hillarious.
The fact is that once the government gets to regulate the internet, they get to regulate it more and more. Rarely have we seen the case where regulations ever go away, so we should avoid it like the plague. Imagine the imposition of taxes on the internet, thats been a meme/troll for years, yet this could make it happen. Imagine the FCC imposing content restrictions because it maybe "violates US interests", that would have people up in arms. If you want to avoid the problem, don't have the government in the business of regulating the internet, period.
If there are problems with content/eyeball providers, the courts should be used to sort that out, it'll be much more effective than any governmental relief ever could be.
Their lame ass servers were always f'ing up. I ended up taking that crap out of my mailer config a few months ago because I was tired of lookups failing and slowing everything down. I switched to ORDB and that seems to work fine. I still get buttloads of spam from other places, but I do see a lot of blocked mail.
Yeah no shit! I did a Linux -> FreeBSD conversion, saved the company a couple hundred grand. How you ask? The servers performed 10x as fast with FreeBSD... no SW mods, no nothing. FreeBSD is just faster, and the boxes also had at least 2x the uptime. The SW always crashed the linux boxes.
For my own personal edification, I did a SMP shootout with my company's hardware (fun fun!).
I had a 4CPU Compaq, and an 8CPU Compaq, each box had 4GB of ram. Linux couldn't address all of it, so it only ran with 2GB, I did find a patch that supposedly made it work with 4GB, but It didn't really seem to make a difference. Both the FreeBSD and Solaris systems supported 4GB, and probably would've used more had I tossed more ram into the machines. Those lovely removeable drives made it *super* easy to do comparasons between systems. I loaded up Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris X86. I have to admit, I didn't particularly get great SMP support out of FreeBSD, but it did work fine, was relatively quick, was stable, and yes could handle more load. Solaris X86 was *the* hands down winner. I got the boxes to finish load tests 2-3 times faster with SolX86 - No crashes, no burps. Linux crashed on me 5 times during the 6 hours testing period, so I didn't get really good results out of it. FreeBSD didn't do anything bad, nice solid stable performance. However, I did manage to get the Linux system to do some work for a continuous period of time before I finished up the test on it, however it corrupted ext2fs and I lost the data (whee). From what I saw of it before the data went *poof* the Linux box was marginally faster than the FreeBSD system (yes, even with the big giant lock). If FreeBSD's SMP support is that fast in the state its in now, I'll be very pleasantly treated to even better performance.
Ask someone who's worked with both, and they will tell you that Solaris has superior SMP at this point in time. Simply put, I converted a website from Linux based dynamic content servers to Solaris X86 and the site was about 4x faster just by doing that. Explain that? I had several people review my configs, they were fine according to them. I had *SEVERAL* problems while using Linux, so converting to SolX86 worked great. We worked those boxes hard, so thats possibly why you're having no issues, no serious load.
Well, as someone who's used both, I'd have to say go with which ever you're more familiar with. I believe they'll run binaries from either system on eachother now. FreeBSD has a *massive* ports collectio, while NetBSD's is not so big. FreeBSD has your nice friendly installer that you would be familiar with on the X86 side. Source trees for FreeBSD are the same on both ends, what hardware support FreeBSD offers for X86 also goes to Alpha (for the most part). NetBSD now supports Alpha-SMP, so if you have a box with more than one CPU, there you go. However FreeBSD apparently has this coming along as well. I like FreeBSD personally, but NetBSD is a great OS too. I've run it on my Alphas, Sparcs, X86's and Macs... FreeBSD only supports x86 and Alpha, so if you only have those two platforms, there ya go! If you want more than one hardware platform, but the same OS, NetBSD...
Actually, it can be very different in a variety of ways. In some cases, API's changed, which can be a really big deal. If its 'just a kernel update' then why would an API change drastically? Granted, I am not one programming with Linux Kernel API's at the moment (I happen to enjoy my BSD systems), but I would be pretty pissed off if an API broke in the middle of a 'just a bunch of patches' update...
nah, whenever people come out with patch branches, you've got different versions. They don't get integrated in till El Dictator (Linus) decides the patches get in to the main kernel. Till then, they're separate, and essentially a different version.
Possibly:)
Its been SMP capable since 3.0
Sure it wasn't great then, but during the 3.X-RELEASE branch its been pretty damn solid on the systems I used it on. 4.X I saw a lot of improvements, and now with 5.X its gone through a redo to make it even faster than before. FreeBSD/SMP was already really fast with the limitations it had, now it'll be even faster.
Have you ever seen linux actually running with 32 Processors? You'd be suprised as to how many people haven't run any OS with 2 CPUS... Personally, I've had some very horrible experiences with Linux/SMP, in fact total disasters. After switching to FreeBSD and SolarisX86 on the same boxes, I got better performance and no more issues. Personally, I think its neat that linux can run on a buncha cpu's, but the fact that it does it doesn't mean you should use it...
Is a great step forward for NetBSD/Alpha.
I've used NetBSD on a wide variety of platforms, I can definately say that its been a lot more usable than other OS'es I've tried. Yes, its not a big deal in comparason to Tru64, which can run on a disgusting amount of CPU's on Alpha Hardware, but hey, its a start.
Use Solaris X86.
Its SMP is superior to Linux's, its also much more stable. As far as Oracle Support goes, Oracle Support is 10x better for Solaris x86. If you're going to use Oracle, and pay for licenses, you might as well do it and get the support you need. Linux is a waste of time for production or development with Oracle.
As one of the Senior Sysadmins who has worked on sites like MSN-Linkexchange and Hotmail, sites that serve *ENORMOUS* amounts of traffic with FreeBSD and Apache. A *single* PII-450 with 128MB of ram could serve well over a million hits per day. The trick is concurrency, and well, 64MB of ram would probably suck, but thats still ~50 active connections at a time under FreeBSD. If you're getting 50 hits per second, and your request takes a second or less, hey, thats a lotta hits:)
You'd be suprised but I've benchmarked Solaris X86 versus Linux X86 (both SMP), Solaris kicked linux's ass for serving Perl/Mod_perl.
The Linux box could serve 25 requests per second, the *exact* same box running Solaris served over 500 requests per second... And you can't say we didn't have good perl tuning, we hired the guy who wrote Mod_Perl to do a lot of stuff with us. Sun has good reasoning to move their stuff to Solaris X86, it will probably mean the longevity of Solaris X86 which is a kickass product. Solaris/Itanium will be sweet!
They could switch it to NetBSD since its more secure and faster than Linux on the same platform... Sun has good feelings about BSD so I don't see why not. Chances are Sun will discontinue the crummy lil MIPS based boxes and use all X86 based stuff, make it cheap, run whatever the hell they want on it, and make a buttload of money off it. The big thing cobalt was selling was their WebGUI, and it will not be hard to convert that to any other OS...
Linux will stay for a while, but Sun has a better OS to put on the box. One thats more mature and reliable... Solaris X86... However, the products that still use the MIPS chips will probably stay Linux for a while, or they might switch to NetBSD/OpenBSD since its more secure than Linux. Who knows, Sun could kill the product line, but chances are they won't for a while at least. Not like Sun is gonna kill development of Linux/MIPS any time soon... Chances are sun will keep the Cobalt interface stuff, go through it and get rid of the Linuxisms, and re-package it as a simple management interface for commercial sale. Who knows what after that...
The answer should be pretty obvious to everyone.
Anyone looked a the list of exploits for the Linux LPD subsystem? Its long... If they were smart, they'd use BSD so they wouldn't have to worry about GPL issues. Hey, since the box is using Linux, don't they have to provide the source code or references to where the source code is located?
And don't forget that you can still print to the box through samba unless you're a tard.
Ok, how about this. I'm an Ex-Microsoft Employee, and I'll confirm everything that was said within my legal limits of course:) Besides, if you don't believe me, believe NETCRAFT - http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=ad.linkexchang e.com
How can you even say Windows 2000 is comparable to FreeBSD? Sheesh....
Its not Sun's fault Fujitsu makes shitty chips. I had an 8 CPU E4500 fail because of the 400Mhz 8MB E-Cache chips, and Sun replaced the chips. Its still chugging away after 6 months of uptime running Oracle. 8CPU 8GB ram, its fine... I've got another 4500 with 8CPU 5GB ram and thats been fine too. Hell, if people were smart they'd be running with DMP/DC so that even if a CPU fails, the OS routes around it.
About the only thing that would make me happier with Google, is if they switched their crap-ass Linux stuff to FreeBSD. I'd be really happy to see their search even faster:)
Actually, I've heard rumors that they're switching some crawler machines to FreeBSD, way to go google!
http://www.mainsoft.com/press/pr-mplayer.html
I get their newsletter, they're porting a whole bunch of IE based stuff to Solaris. I really doubt they'll be porting anything to Linux any time soon though. Especially considering the free OS of choice is redmond is FreeBSD... Linux is PR poison to them because of the competition hype, FreeBSD has stayed in the background and makes no bones about trying to compete with NT. They're in different markets...
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why this is not a left/right issue.
The right currently doesn't want to regulate the internet, we should all want that.
The left currently wants to regulate the internet and impose restrictions on it, do not want!
The fact that people trust the FCC to regulate the internet when the same people don't want the FCC regulating TV/Radio is what makes this whole issue so hillarious.
The fact is that once the government gets to regulate the internet, they get to regulate it more and more.
Rarely have we seen the case where regulations ever go away, so we should avoid it like the plague.
Imagine the imposition of taxes on the internet, thats been a meme/troll for years, yet this could make it happen.
Imagine the FCC imposing content restrictions because it maybe "violates US interests", that would have people up in arms.
If you want to avoid the problem, don't have the government in the business of regulating the internet, period.
If there are problems with content/eyeball providers, the courts should be used to sort that out, it'll be much more effective than any
governmental relief ever could be.
Their lame ass servers were always f'ing up. I ended up taking that crap out of my mailer config a few months ago because I was tired of lookups failing and slowing everything down.
I switched to ORDB and that seems to work fine.
I still get buttloads of spam from other places, but I do see a lot of blocked mail.
Yeah no shit!
I did a Linux -> FreeBSD conversion, saved the company a couple hundred grand. How you ask? The servers performed 10x as fast with FreeBSD... no SW mods, no nothing. FreeBSD is just faster, and the boxes also had at least 2x the uptime. The SW always crashed the linux boxes.
Check out the FreeBSD SMP Mailing list. Around friday, April 20th. Check THIS out! :)
Dual Athlon 1.2GHZ CPU's, FreeBSD SMP, stock -current branch.
For my own personal edification, I did a SMP shootout with my company's hardware (fun fun!).
I had a 4CPU Compaq, and an 8CPU Compaq, each box had 4GB of ram. Linux couldn't address all of it, so it only ran with 2GB, I did find a patch that supposedly made it work with 4GB, but It didn't really seem to make a difference. Both the FreeBSD and Solaris systems supported 4GB, and probably would've used more had I tossed more ram into the machines. Those lovely removeable drives made it *super* easy to do comparasons between systems. I loaded up Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris X86. I have to admit, I didn't particularly get great SMP support out of FreeBSD, but it did work fine, was relatively quick, was stable, and yes could handle more load. Solaris X86 was *the* hands down winner. I got the boxes to finish load tests 2-3 times faster with SolX86 - No crashes, no burps. Linux crashed on me 5 times during the 6 hours testing period, so I didn't get really good results out of it. FreeBSD didn't do anything bad, nice solid stable performance. However, I did manage to get the Linux system to do some work for a continuous period of time before I finished up the test on it, however it corrupted ext2fs and I lost the data (whee). From what I saw of it before the data went *poof* the Linux box was marginally faster than the FreeBSD system (yes, even with the big giant lock). If FreeBSD's SMP support is that fast in the state its in now, I'll be very pleasantly treated to even better performance.
I didn't say I was running FreeBSD on my big SMP boxes, I was running SolarisX86. Pay attention AC...
Ask someone who's worked with both, and they will tell you that Solaris has superior SMP at this point in time. Simply put, I converted a website from Linux based dynamic content servers to Solaris X86 and the site was about 4x faster just by doing that. Explain that? I had several people review my configs, they were fine according to them. I had *SEVERAL* problems while using Linux, so converting to SolX86 worked great. We worked those boxes hard, so thats possibly why you're having no issues, no serious load.
Well, as someone who's used both, I'd have to say go with which ever you're more familiar with. I believe they'll run binaries from either system on eachother now. FreeBSD has a *massive* ports collectio, while NetBSD's is not so big. FreeBSD has your nice friendly installer that you would be familiar with on the X86 side. Source trees for FreeBSD are the same on both ends, what hardware support FreeBSD offers for X86 also goes to Alpha (for the most part). NetBSD now supports Alpha-SMP, so if you have a box with more than one CPU, there you go. However FreeBSD apparently has this coming along as well. I like FreeBSD personally, but NetBSD is a great OS too. I've run it on my Alphas, Sparcs, X86's and Macs... FreeBSD only supports x86 and Alpha, so if you only have those two platforms, there ya go! If you want more than one hardware platform, but the same OS, NetBSD...
Actually, it can be very different in a variety of ways. In some cases, API's changed, which can be a really big deal. If its 'just a kernel update' then why would an API change drastically? Granted, I am not one programming with Linux Kernel API's at the moment (I happen to enjoy my BSD systems), but I would be pretty pissed off if an API broke in the middle of a 'just a bunch of patches' update...
nah, whenever people come out with patch branches, you've got different versions. They don't get integrated in till El Dictator (Linus) decides the patches get in to the main kernel. Till then, they're separate, and essentially a different version.
Possibly :)
Its been SMP capable since 3.0
Sure it wasn't great then, but during the 3.X-RELEASE branch its been pretty damn solid on the systems I used it on. 4.X I saw a lot of improvements, and now with 5.X its gone through a redo to make it even faster than before. FreeBSD/SMP was already really fast with the limitations it had, now it'll be even faster.
Or you could use FreeBSD or BSD/OS.
Both are Very BSD and they both run on X86 boxes with more than One CPU (and can use the other CPU's)
Have you ever seen linux actually running with 32 Processors? You'd be suprised as to how many people haven't run any OS with 2 CPUS... Personally, I've had some very horrible experiences with Linux/SMP, in fact total disasters. After switching to FreeBSD and SolarisX86 on the same boxes, I got better performance and no more issues. Personally, I think its neat that linux can run on a buncha cpu's, but the fact that it does it doesn't mean you should use it...
Is a great step forward for NetBSD/Alpha.
I've used NetBSD on a wide variety of platforms, I can definately say that its been a lot more usable than other OS'es I've tried. Yes, its not a big deal in comparason to Tru64, which can run on a disgusting amount of CPU's on Alpha Hardware, but hey, its a start.
Like all Monkeys, Bonobo is best left to the thousand monkeys of Linux.
Use Solaris X86.
Its SMP is superior to Linux's, its also much more stable. As far as Oracle Support goes, Oracle Support is 10x better for Solaris x86. If you're going to use Oracle, and pay for licenses, you might as well do it and get the support you need. Linux is a waste of time for production or development with Oracle.
As one of the Senior Sysadmins who has worked on sites like MSN-Linkexchange and Hotmail, sites that serve *ENORMOUS* amounts of traffic with FreeBSD and Apache. A *single* PII-450 with 128MB of ram could serve well over a million hits per day. The trick is concurrency, and well, 64MB of ram would probably suck, but thats still ~50 active connections at a time under FreeBSD. If you're getting 50 hits per second, and your request takes a second or less, hey, thats a lotta hits :)
You'd be suprised but I've benchmarked Solaris X86 versus Linux X86 (both SMP), Solaris kicked linux's ass for serving Perl/Mod_perl.
The Linux box could serve 25 requests per second, the *exact* same box running Solaris served over 500 requests per second... And you can't say we didn't have good perl tuning, we hired the guy who wrote Mod_Perl to do a lot of stuff with us. Sun has good reasoning to move their stuff to Solaris X86, it will probably mean the longevity of Solaris X86 which is a kickass product. Solaris/Itanium will be sweet!
They could switch it to NetBSD since its more secure and faster than Linux on the same platform... Sun has good feelings about BSD so I don't see why not. Chances are Sun will discontinue the crummy lil MIPS based boxes and use all X86 based stuff, make it cheap, run whatever the hell they want on it, and make a buttload of money off it. The big thing cobalt was selling was their WebGUI, and it will not be hard to convert that to any other OS...
Linux will stay for a while, but Sun has a better OS to put on the box. One thats more mature and reliable... Solaris X86... However, the products that still use the MIPS chips will probably stay Linux for a while, or they might switch to NetBSD/OpenBSD since its more secure than Linux. Who knows, Sun could kill the product line, but chances are they won't for a while at least. Not like Sun is gonna kill development of Linux/MIPS any time soon... Chances are sun will keep the Cobalt interface stuff, go through it and get rid of the Linuxisms, and re-package it as a simple management interface for commercial sale. Who knows what after that...
The answer should be pretty obvious to everyone.
Anyone looked a the list of exploits for the Linux LPD subsystem? Its long... If they were smart, they'd use BSD so they wouldn't have to worry about GPL issues. Hey, since the box is using Linux, don't they have to provide the source code or references to where the source code is located?
And don't forget that you can still print to the box through samba unless you're a tard.
Ok, how about this. I'm an Ex-Microsoft Employee, and I'll confirm everything that was said within my legal limits of course :) Besides, if you don't believe me, believe NETCRAFT - http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=ad.linkexchang e.com
How can you even say Windows 2000 is comparable to FreeBSD? Sheesh....
Its not Sun's fault Fujitsu makes shitty chips. I had an 8 CPU E4500 fail because of the 400Mhz 8MB E-Cache chips, and Sun replaced the chips. Its still chugging away after 6 months of uptime running Oracle. 8CPU 8GB ram, its fine... I've got another 4500 with 8CPU 5GB ram and thats been fine too. Hell, if people were smart they'd be running with DMP/DC so that even if a CPU fails, the OS routes around it.
About the only thing that would make me happier with Google, is if they switched their crap-ass Linux stuff to FreeBSD. I'd be really happy to see their search even faster :)
Actually, I've heard rumors that they're switching some crawler machines to FreeBSD, way to go google!
http://www.mainsoft.com/press/pr-mplayer.html
I get their newsletter, they're porting a whole bunch of IE based stuff to Solaris. I really doubt they'll be porting anything to Linux any time soon though. Especially considering the free OS of choice is redmond is FreeBSD... Linux is PR poison to them because of the competition hype, FreeBSD has stayed in the background and makes no bones about trying to compete with NT. They're in different markets...