Lots of their employees are low end data center techs who run cables and replace parts in the servers. Each data center has less than 150 people, and they are an independant group from the remembering relationships standpoint. Its not like they have 3000 researchers/programmers all in one office working on this stuff. Thousands of companies have more than 3000 people, and they all do it the same way, splitting them into managable groups, just like google does.
There has been something wrong with it for quite some time. It would crawl one particular site, every single page, over 40 times per day, for 3 weeks before I just blocked the damn thing. Yet it didn't do this to my other sites, which all link to each other. If you look around on "webmaster" forums and such, plenty of people have this problem.
Nobody knows why it goes crazy like this on some sites, but not most. Regardless, it is broken, its not FUD.
It was real life trolling, not online trolling that is linkable. PHK went to BSDCan, and during an openbsd presentation on their wireless card support, started trying to claim they are doing something illegal by using reverse engineered code in their free drivers, and saying they should be happy with binary only freebsd drivers.
Don't "so?" me, you are the one that brought it up. I didn't say mach was fast, or good, or anything else. I just pointed out that you are acting like mach is to blame for intel's design flaw.
See, if you have 60 developers who never talk and don't have anything in common, then your bullshit commitee attitude is required just to get anything done. But if you have 60 developers who all understand and agree with a clear set of goals, then they don't have to waste time blathering and bickering about how to do what. They can just start doing it, go "hey check this out", and have other people help.
It would be just awful if someone pointing out that PHK is an abnoxious troll (not just on line, in real life even) that makes freebsd developers spend more time saying "PHK is talking out his ass, he does't represent us" than coding.
Because any time someone points out something you don't like, they must be a troll, right? Good thing so many slashtards feel that way and will dutifully mod the guy down as a troll.
The SMP support certainly borrowed from netbsd, but there's significant differences in the kernels after all these years, and its not a matter of just "importing wholesale".
Pf would have been a nice example of what's been accomplished at a hackathon, and something that both freebsd and netbsd have borrowed from openbsd. Code sharing is a good thing, quit acting like a tard.
Read the openbsd misc mailing list archives. Scott posted to websites denouncing openbsd's efforts to open up documentation for adaptec controllers because he used to work there. He also lied and said that this kind of thing doesn't help and makes openbsd look bad, despite it proving effective repeatedly in the past, and all three BSDs benefiting from it.
While there's not that much political "forces" between the BSDs, freebsd developers publicly trying to prevent openbsd developers from improving their OS, and lying about the situation is one of the few cases. See PHKs recent trolling at BSDcan for another example.
Perhaps you should read more carefully what Linus has said about starting linux. He didn't make linux to be the kernel for GNU, he wanted a replacement for minix that was functional instead of educational. He chose to do this by making a kernel, and using the GNU utilities that already existed at that point. Had those GNU utilities not existed, he could have still made a functional minix replacement by using other free userland utilities, including from BSD. The GNU software was not a fundamental building block in the development of linux, it was just a convenient block, which could have been, and still can be replaced with superior software.
While RMS was busy trying to spread his own breed of GNU/communism, BSD happened. And linux would likely still exist without the FSF anyways, it just wouldn't be GPL, Linus could have written a simple license of his own, big deal. The only significant contribution the FSF has made is their buggy and slow compiler/toolchain. Quit buying the RMS lies that he is the sole cause of the concept of open source software, and is thus responsable for all open source software in existance.
Context switches are not rediculously slow on all architectures, so "a ton of context switches" isn't that big a deal unless you are using a poorly designed architecture that hasn't been improved, ever.
Python, and mozilla are both significantly better than what you compared them too. And C++ vs Java is like monolithic kernel vs cheddar cheese, they aren't designed as or used for the same things at all, so of course neither is "better".
The only comparison of yours that really works is coke vs pepsi. And obviously the answer is coke.
First of all, having modules or not has no effect on being monolithic. The entire kernel is a single process that simply executes code, wether its compiled into the kernel, or loaded into the kernel as a module makes no difference here. Microkernels actually have seperate processes for different parts of the kernel, and they cannot execute code from each other, they must communicate back and forth using some sort of message passing system.
And second, no BSD based kernel forces you to use modules. Have you actually tried any BSD? Modules are entirely optional, just like linux. In fact, openbsd's kernel only has support for modules, but nothing is actually compiled as a module, and using modules is unsupported.
The apache 2 license is not free.
on
Open source Java?
·
· Score: 0, Troll
They put in a bungled mess of patent nonsense, despite software licenses being for copyright law, not patent law. This mess is worded such that if you use software licensed under this license, you agree never to sue them, even if they say, steal your GPL code and stick it in a project of theirs. If you do sue them, then you aren't allowed to use the software anymore, and they can sue you for using it. It may not have been intended to facilitate code theft, but it can still be used that way, and despite being warned of this issue before the license was finalized, the apache people went ahead with the broken version anyhow.
Haha, nice work mods.
on
Open source Java?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
If you aren't going to read the link, don't moderate the post. Its a troll post from a troll weblog.
Every google data center has several entry level techs who spend all their time troubleshooting and fixing broken machines. And there is no work involved in finding the broken machine, the racks are organized, its very simple.
That's a great example of Cringly talking out of his ass though.
Re:Commercial flavours of unix maybe.
on
FreeBSD 5.4 Released
·
· Score: 0, Troll
How about you give some evidence of either of your bullshit claims then?
Commercial flavours of unix maybe.
on
FreeBSD 5.4 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Netbsd and openbsd are just as fast as freebsd with the fixes, and so are most linux distros. Its really only commercial unix vendors that are slow with the fixes.
I am not sure why you think I am inviting you to nitpick the details, or why you think I am trying to prove something. The only thing that would show what you want would be a detailed case study, which I am not doing. I posted my opinion, just like the poster I replied to posted his opinion. If you want to do a case study on PHP performance go for it, I am sure you can get it posted to slashdot when you're done.
I'm going to have to disagree here. PHP becomes very hard to manage when a project gets very large and complex. Basically, we had to limit how much object oriented coding we did because PHP4's oo was so slow, and this site saw very high traffic. We ended up having to choose between performance problems, or maintenaince problems. This may not be such a problem with PHP5 though, I don't know.
Either run your mailserver on openbsd so you can use spamd right on the mailserver, or find an old pentium laying around, install openbsd on that and stick it in front of your mail server.
Openbsd's spamd tarpits blacklisted machines, which is nice and all. But the real benefit is its greylisting before anything even hits your MTA. All by itself, spamd almost eliminated all my spam and viruses, just because of greylisting, without adding any noticable load to the server at all. Then clamav and whatever spam filter you like can deal with whatever actually gets to the MTA, which will cut the load down tremendously.
Removing the compiler from a linux machine seems to be a common strategy for newbie admins to "secure" their machines. It doesn't accomplish anything. If I could compile something on your machine, I can just as easily compile something on my machine and upload it to your machine. Worms don't need to patch source code to create new holes, they can just replace binaries, libraries, etc.
Apache isn't meant to be the fastest webserver out there. Its a very flexible, configurable server with good enough performance. IIS is designed for high performance, and even speeds things up by using a kernel driver to do part of the request. If you want a more reasonable comparison, try comparing IIS to something designed to be fast like lighttpd.
Tune all you want, apache will not match the performance of fast web servers like zeus and lighttpd. And it can't handle as many concurrent connections either. This benchmark is not a big deal, and its not suprising. Apache is not meant to be high performing, it is increidbly flexible and configurable, and performs well enough for most tasks. If you need higher performance use a webserver designed just for high performance.
Slashdot Mirror
The installer is very simple, you press "a" to add a partition, and it prompts you to put in the size, type, mount point, etc.
Then you say you are "done" and it creates the disklabel for you. The CD even has a handy step by step guide to using the installer on the sleeve.
Lots of their employees are low end data center techs who run cables and replace parts in the servers. Each data center has less than 150 people, and they are an independant group from the remembering relationships standpoint. Its not like they have 3000 researchers/programmers all in one office working on this stuff. Thousands of companies have more than 3000 people, and they all do it the same way, splitting them into managable groups, just like google does.
There has been something wrong with it for quite some time. It would crawl one particular site, every single page, over 40 times per day, for 3 weeks before I just blocked the damn thing. Yet it didn't do this to my other sites, which all link to each other. If you look around on "webmaster" forums and such, plenty of people have this problem.
Nobody knows why it goes crazy like this on some sites, but not most. Regardless, it is broken, its not FUD.
It was real life trolling, not online trolling that is linkable. PHK went to BSDCan, and during an openbsd presentation on their wireless card support, started trying to claim they are doing something illegal by using reverse engineered code in their free drivers, and saying they should be happy with binary only freebsd drivers.
1 619770429208&w=2
Here's a link to Theo forwarding PHKs email about trolling at BSDCan to the openbsd list though:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=11
Don't "so?" me, you are the one that brought it up. I didn't say mach was fast, or good, or anything else. I just pointed out that you are acting like mach is to blame for intel's design flaw.
See, if you have 60 developers who never talk and don't have anything in common, then your bullshit commitee attitude is required just to get anything done. But if you have 60 developers who all understand and agree with a clear set of goals, then they don't have to waste time blathering and bickering about how to do what. They can just start doing it, go "hey check this out", and have other people help.
It would be just awful if someone pointing out that PHK is an abnoxious troll (not just on line, in real life even) that makes freebsd developers spend more time saying "PHK is talking out his ass, he does't represent us" than coding.
Because any time someone points out something you don't like, they must be a troll, right? Good thing so many slashtards feel that way and will dutifully mod the guy down as a troll.
The SMP support certainly borrowed from netbsd, but there's significant differences in the kernels after all these years, and its not a matter of just "importing wholesale".
Pf would have been a nice example of what's been accomplished at a hackathon, and something that both freebsd and netbsd have borrowed from openbsd. Code sharing is a good thing, quit acting like a tard.
Read the openbsd misc mailing list archives. Scott posted to websites denouncing openbsd's efforts to open up documentation for adaptec controllers because he used to work there. He also lied and said that this kind of thing doesn't help and makes openbsd look bad, despite it proving effective repeatedly in the past, and all three BSDs benefiting from it.
While there's not that much political "forces" between the BSDs, freebsd developers publicly trying to prevent openbsd developers from improving their OS, and lying about the situation is one of the few cases. See PHKs recent trolling at BSDcan for another example.
Perhaps you should read more carefully what Linus has said about starting linux. He didn't make linux to be the kernel for GNU, he wanted a replacement for minix that was functional instead of educational. He chose to do this by making a kernel, and using the GNU utilities that already existed at that point. Had those GNU utilities not existed, he could have still made a functional minix replacement by using other free userland utilities, including from BSD. The GNU software was not a fundamental building block in the development of linux, it was just a convenient block, which could have been, and still can be replaced with superior software.
While RMS was busy trying to spread his own breed of GNU/communism, BSD happened. And linux would likely still exist without the FSF anyways, it just wouldn't be GPL, Linus could have written a simple license of his own, big deal. The only significant contribution the FSF has made is their buggy and slow compiler/toolchain. Quit buying the RMS lies that he is the sole cause of the concept of open source software, and is thus responsable for all open source software in existance.
Context switches are not rediculously slow on all architectures, so "a ton of context switches" isn't that big a deal unless you are using a poorly designed architecture that hasn't been improved, ever.
Python, and mozilla are both significantly better than what you compared them too. And C++ vs Java is like monolithic kernel vs cheddar cheese, they aren't designed as or used for the same things at all, so of course neither is "better".
The only comparison of yours that really works is coke vs pepsi. And obviously the answer is coke.
First of all, having modules or not has no effect on being monolithic. The entire kernel is a single process that simply executes code, wether its compiled into the kernel, or loaded into the kernel as a module makes no difference here. Microkernels actually have seperate processes for different parts of the kernel, and they cannot execute code from each other, they must communicate back and forth using some sort of message passing system.
And second, no BSD based kernel forces you to use modules. Have you actually tried any BSD? Modules are entirely optional, just like linux. In fact, openbsd's kernel only has support for modules, but nothing is actually compiled as a module, and using modules is unsupported.
They put in a bungled mess of patent nonsense, despite software licenses being for copyright law, not patent law. This mess is worded such that if you use software licensed under this license, you agree never to sue them, even if they say, steal your GPL code and stick it in a project of theirs. If you do sue them, then you aren't allowed to use the software anymore, and they can sue you for using it. It may not have been intended to facilitate code theft, but it can still be used that way, and despite being warned of this issue before the license was finalized, the apache people went ahead with the broken version anyhow.
If you aren't going to read the link, don't moderate the post. Its a troll post from a troll weblog.
Every google data center has several entry level techs who spend all their time troubleshooting and fixing broken machines. And there is no work involved in finding the broken machine, the racks are organized, its very simple.
That's a great example of Cringly talking out of his ass though.
How about you give some evidence of either of your bullshit claims then?
Netbsd and openbsd are just as fast as freebsd with the fixes, and so are most linux distros. Its really only commercial unix vendors that are slow with the fixes.
I am not sure why you think I am inviting you to nitpick the details, or why you think I am trying to prove something. The only thing that would show what you want would be a detailed case study, which I am not doing. I posted my opinion, just like the poster I replied to posted his opinion. If you want to do a case study on PHP performance go for it, I am sure you can get it posted to slashdot when you're done.
I'm going to have to disagree here. PHP becomes very hard to manage when a project gets very large and complex. Basically, we had to limit how much object oriented coding we did because PHP4's oo was so slow, and this site saw very high traffic. We ended up having to choose between performance problems, or maintenaince problems. This may not be such a problem with PHP5 though, I don't know.
Either run your mailserver on openbsd so you can use spamd right on the mailserver, or find an old pentium laying around, install openbsd on that and stick it in front of your mail server.
Openbsd's spamd tarpits blacklisted machines, which is nice and all. But the real benefit is its greylisting before anything even hits your MTA. All by itself, spamd almost eliminated all my spam and viruses, just because of greylisting, without adding any noticable load to the server at all. Then clamav and whatever spam filter you like can deal with whatever actually gets to the MTA, which will cut the load down tremendously.
Removing the compiler from a linux machine seems to be a common strategy for newbie admins to "secure" their machines. It doesn't accomplish anything. If I could compile something on your machine, I can just as easily compile something on my machine and upload it to your machine. Worms don't need to patch source code to create new holes, they can just replace binaries, libraries, etc.
Apache isn't meant to be the fastest webserver out there. Its a very flexible, configurable server with good enough performance. IIS is designed for high performance, and even speeds things up by using a kernel driver to do part of the request. If you want a more reasonable comparison, try comparing IIS to something designed to be fast like lighttpd.
Tune all you want, apache will not match the performance of fast web servers like zeus and lighttpd. And it can't handle as many concurrent connections either. This benchmark is not a big deal, and its not suprising. Apache is not meant to be high performing, it is increidbly flexible and configurable, and performs well enough for most tasks. If you need higher performance use a webserver designed just for high performance.