The BX chipset has a limit of 1gb of RAM. GX (ie Xeon processors) is bigger than this, but not sure what the limit is - possibly 2mb. No idea with the LX.
Effective limits can be less than this, though - the Klamath core (most PIIs = 333, some 300's, a very few 266's, plus Celeron 266s and 300s) and Mendocino (Celeron A's) cores can cache 4gb. Not sure about the Xeons but they'll be at least 4gb.
I believe that was 9x, not NT, although I'm ready to be corrected. Never seen a Windows machine run that long, although we did have a 98 machine at work make it to 35 days (it was doing nothing more involved than putting our label printer on the network...)
If there was ever an example of a story that deserved its very own icon, this is it. What a sight it'd be, along all the KDE icons, internet icons, Tux icons etc, if there was a perfectly shaped pair of front bits right there alongside.:-p~~~
Hmmm. Was talking to a friend at work (I work with Linux, she works with NT in a different department) and she spoke with horror at finding an NT machine that nobody had restarted in eight months. I actually thought this was a pretty good showing for NT, until she added that after rebooting it didn't come back up again:-)
Something that seems to be completely forgotten about is that the test machine Mindcraft used had, if I remember correctly, 4 NICs in it. What about the possibility that the whole reason for the NT numbers being bigger is that NT simply supports multiple network cards that much better, with Linux support being rather basic (akin to the very basic SMP support in 2.0.x kernels)?
They tried the tests again on a single processor machine with 256mb RAM. Did they try them on a machine with just one NIC to check a possibility like this? Surely nobody can suggest a single processor machine with 256mb and 4 NICs is a configuration that any sensible person would consider.
And if these tests are based purely on static content, then so what? I don't need a quad-Xeon to saturate a 10mb ethernet (which is a waaaay faster link than the vast majority of sites out there have) - my P133 manages it quite happily, with around 80% CPU free.
>Remember that big round pie faced thing that >floated around. Damm... that scared the crap out >of me. I was having nightmares about that thing.
That would be a Cacodemon. It was about the time that I had a dream about Doom in which I tried to kill one by jumping up and down on it (note: I am not the slimmest person in the world so this might just have been effective) that I wondered if I mightn't be getting obsessed and if I should give it a break for a while...:-)
At work our various branches were cut off by email for several hours while the inhouse support guys cleared virus infections everywhere. I spent a couple of hours going round our branch updating virus definitions and running scans on all the machines - a huge waste of my time, and theirs. Surely I'm not the only one stuck with working at a company that uses M$ products...
(on the positive side...we had the odd customer coming in with infections, all chargeable work to fix that - which is good for the company at least)
Ghost has been bought by Symantec and is a commercial product now, but you should be able to find older versions around. It can make images of partitions or entire HDs, can use image files or go disk-to-disk, compress as it goes, and can re-size partitions using filesystems it knows about (FAT*, NTFS). Worth its weight in gold to us at work.
Slashdot Mirror
The BX chipset has a limit of 1gb of RAM. GX (ie Xeon processors) is bigger than this, but not sure what the limit is - possibly 2mb. No idea with the LX.
Effective limits can be less than this, though - the Klamath core (most PIIs = 333, some 300's, a very few 266's, plus Celeron 266s and 300s) and Mendocino (Celeron A's) cores can cache 4gb. Not sure about the Xeons but they'll be at least 4gb.
I believe that was 9x, not NT, although I'm ready to be corrected. Never seen a Windows machine run that long, although we did have a 98 machine at work make it to 35 days (it was doing nothing more involved than putting our label printer on the network...)
If there was ever an example of a story that deserved its very own icon, this is it. What a sight it'd be, along all the KDE icons, internet icons, Tux icons etc, if there was a perfectly shaped pair of front bits right there alongside. :-p~~~
Hmmm. Was talking to a friend at work (I work with Linux, she works with NT in a different department) and she spoke with horror at finding an NT machine that nobody had restarted in eight months. I actually thought this was a pretty good showing for NT, until she added that after rebooting it didn't come back up again :-)
Something that seems to be completely forgotten about is that the test machine Mindcraft used had, if I remember correctly, 4 NICs in it. What about the possibility that the whole reason for the NT numbers being bigger is that NT simply supports multiple network cards that much better, with Linux support being rather basic (akin to the very basic SMP support in 2.0.x kernels)?
They tried the tests again on a single processor machine with 256mb RAM. Did they try them on a machine with just one NIC to check a possibility like this? Surely nobody can suggest a single processor machine with 256mb and 4 NICs is a configuration that any sensible person would consider.
And if these tests are based purely on static content, then so what? I don't need a quad-Xeon to saturate a 10mb ethernet (which is a waaaay faster link than the vast majority of sites out there have) - my P133 manages it quite happily, with around 80% CPU free.
>Remember that big round pie faced thing that >floated around. Damm... that scared the crap out >of me. I was having nightmares about that thing.
:-)
That would be a Cacodemon. It was about the time that I had a dream about Doom in which I tried to kill one by jumping up and down on it (note: I am not the slimmest person in the world so this might just have been effective) that I wondered if I mightn't be getting obsessed and if I should give it a break for a while...
Even 127.0.0.1? Or 10.x.x.x? Or 192.168.x.x? Or whatever that other range of free for internal use addresses is? :-)
At work our various branches were cut off by email for several hours while the inhouse support guys cleared virus infections everywhere. I spent a couple of hours going round our branch updating virus definitions and running scans on all the machines - a huge waste of my time, and theirs. Surely I'm not the only one stuck with working at a company that uses M$ products...
(on the positive side...we had the odd customer coming in with infections, all chargeable work to fix that - which is good for the company at least)
Ghost has been bought by Symantec and is a commercial product now, but you should be able to find older versions around. It can make images of partitions or entire HDs, can use image files or go disk-to-disk, compress as it goes, and can re-size partitions using filesystems it knows about (FAT*, NTFS). Worth its weight in gold to us at work.