[ale] uptime?

[Jeff Hubbs]

I started working with NT in 1995 and I had occasion to observe the trials
and tribulations of our site contractor as they tried to incorporate NT into
a primarily-NetWare environment.  

They quickly adopted the one-NT-server-for-everything school of thought,
which I felt stemmed in part from their use of NetWare systems.  I
personally was hardware-limited; it took me over a year to gain enough
buy-in to obtain (build, actually) a system specifically for the purpose of
running NT Server, and the situation was basically this:  if I wanted some
software running under NT Server, that's the box it had to go on.  So, I
fell into the OTHER, run-every-thing-and-its-brother-on-it school.  I got
pretty good at understanding the limitations, logistical- and
performance-wise, of doing this and I never reached an out-and-out conflict
situation between two apps.  The closest I came was when I had put the
Option Pack on and had enabled the NNTP server, at which time the memory
consumption shot through the roof, even with 1GB RAM.  It turned out that
the NNTP server just acted that way, grabbing some huge amount of available
RAM whether it really needed to or not, but suffice it to say that if I had
had to run that service, I wouldn't want to run much else on that same
system.  

These days, I've leaned a bit more to the other side.  For one thing, I've
started working with Linux a lot, and for another, even real powerful
machines (even 2-way SMP) are pretty much commodity items now.  This makes
me want to purpose-build boxes - give myself headroom where I might need it
and give myself none when I know I won't.  Then there are junkers; the PDC
and BDC for the NT domain I run do almost nothing but those tasks - one is a
P/200 and the other a P/120.  I don't do anything to them, they run
endlessly, and I let them.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Popovitch [mailto:jimpop at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 1:06 PM
> To: Bao Ha
> Cc: ale at ale.org
> Subject: RE: [ale] uptime?
> 
> 
> All the arguements that eveyone is throwing out for NT involve systems
> that are built and then never touched (patched, etc) again.  Clearly
> not real world examples.
> 
> In this latest example (NT/IIS 4/SP4) clearly it's a server that isn't
> up to date.  So can I only assume that with NT servers if you 
> want long
> stability, you have to forfeit applying all the weekly patches that
> Redmond releases, thus exposing yourself and customers/clients.  
> 
>   Match this w/ NT:
> 
> I have two linux servers that have been up > 200 days.  I don't even
> have to go look at them to get the current count, I just *KNOW* that
> they are still up (confidence).
> 
> These servers have a combination of apache, sendmail, bind, mysql,
> mailman, htdig, ssh, and perl.  All those various software packages
> have been upgraded or patched at least twice with in the last 200+
> days.  Additionally, 5 of the original 8 partitions have been migrated
> to newer volumes.  Try that with NT. 
> 
> Hint: you can't ;)
> 
> -Jim P.
> 
> 
> --- Bao Ha <baoh at linuxwizardry.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-ale at ale.org [mailto:owner-ale at ale.org]On Behalf Of Jim
> > > Popovitch
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 9:53 PM
> > > To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
> > > Subject: Re: [ale] uptime?
> > > .....
> > > I have to object to your examples of stable WinNT 'systems'.  WINS
> > &
> > > DNS are minor (majorly minor) apps.  You might have a leg to stand
> > on
> > > if you could say the same thing about a WinNT webserver (IIS or
> > > Apache), and more so if it was one that did something productive.
> > 
> > NT/IIS 4/SP4: hosting more than 30 web sites.
> > 
> > It is about as stable as its two Linux siblings, almost a year!
> > 
> > I also have a Linux server crashed and burned at least once 
> a week.  
> > Well, it is running Debian (unstable) Sid.  I have been doing for
> > more than three years. And last month is the first time I  
> > understand why it deserves the label "unstable".  
> > 
> > I was also the admin of an NT 4/SP4 running Kana's Silknet 100K+
> > CRM package last summer.  That poor thing died almost everyday
> > for three months.  
> > 
> > So, uptime still means S**T!!!
> > 
> > Bao
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe: mail majordomo at ale.org with "unsubscribe ale" in
> > message body.
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices! 
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
--
To unsubscribe: mail majordomo at ale.org with "unsubscribe ale" in message
body.
--
To unsubscribe: mail majordomo at ale.org with "unsubscribe ale" in message body.