Contributed by Dengue on from the jihad-du-jour dept.
(Comments are closed)
OpenBSD Journal
Contributed by Dengue on from the jihad-du-jour dept.
(Comments are closed)
Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]
By David Terrell () dbt@meat.net on http://www.meat.net/~dbt/
given at LinuxTag 2000 (Linux Day 2000) in Germany
that has been discussed a lot since then. Glad
to see the data show up somewhere. More specific
data including the scripts or source code used
in testing would have been nice -- ah well. Looks
good. Interesting to compare how everybody's
performance seems to go up with the FreeBSD NFS
client instead of Linux's. :)
By Tom Kyle () tkyle@spam-me-not.inlink.com on mailto:tkyle@spam-me-not.inlink.com
Also, I think it might be fairer to compare Solaris running on Sparc hardware. An Ultra 10/450 would be a fairly comparable machine, and let's be honest - Solaris is run on WAY more UltraSparcs than x86s. But it sure is cheaper to reinstall OS's on the same hardware. ;^)
Finally, how 'bout mounting NFS volumes from a third-party fileserver, say a NetApp filer? I know, I know, cost issues...
Comments
By Warp Eight Bot () warpeightbot at-sign yahoo! dot-com on http://www.lp.org
You wanna hot rod it, vote with your feet and find a different study.
Comments
By Tom Kyle () tkyle@spam-me-not.inlink.com on mailto:tkyle@spam-me-not.inlink.com
Er, so why would you be concerned about performance . If that's the focus group, ease of setup, security, and reliability are far more important than performance. Commercial support also becomes important to many of these people.
If you're going to be out for performance, you're not going to buy a low-buck system. Unless, of course, you buy several and get them to distribute the load...
By Nobody You'd Know () on
As for running Solaris on an Ultra, that's a nice idea, but it would change the study from "which OS is best" to "which platform is best." That wasn't the author's goal.
And as for IDE vs SCSI, I suggest you get a modern IDE drive and controller, make sure there is nothing ATAPI on the same channel with the drive, and test it. Frankly, if your OS can do the fancy DMA modes and whatnot on the newer IDE stuff, you can blow away all but the MOST expensive SCSI controllers and disks at a ridiculous fraction of
the cost. When the newer serial IDE spec makes it into real hardware, that'll pretty much be the end of SCSI on anything smaller than a hardware RAID array, save for a few religious zealots of the same sort who still swear that they can "hear" the sampling error on CDs.
Comments
By Matthew Weigel () mcweigel+@cs.cmu.edu on mailto:mcweigel+@cs.cmu.edu
Yeah, but "which platform is best, particularly at a certain price point," is what matters -- if discussing what matters "wasn't the author's goal," then, well, why should we care what he says? It clearly doesn't matter. Particularly when you consider systems like Net and OpenBSD, where really can pick the platform to suit the needs, standardizing on a single architecture obfuscates the results. And as for IDE vs SCSI, I suggest you get a modern IDE drive and controller, make sure there is nothing ATAPI on the same channel with the drive, and test it.
And I suggest you get two modern IDE drives on a single IDE controller, versus three modern SCSI drives on a single SCSI controller, and compare performance. I don't care how fast an individual drive is on my servers (beyond a certain point); I care about how well the disk handles increasing numbers of concurrent requests. Remember, we're not talking about workstation performance here, but server -- web and NFS, most notably -- performance. If I didn't mind not being able to switch out disks amongst my systems I'd be (mostly) happy to use IDE on workstations, since you're going to need less disk access. On the server? No.
Comments
By Nobody You'd Know () on
Besides, bang for the buck, if you're spending less than $10,000, -quality- IA32 hardware wins. Any honest person who does the numbers and doesn't let technosnobbery cloud his sight knows that -without- a big new study.
It sounds like you want to know what's good -above- that price range. Honestly, if you're quibbling over saving a couple thousand bucks on a machine that expensive, you either can't afford it or don't need it. This is why you don't see pricing information for E10k machines on Sun's web site. Nobody comparison shops for that stuff unless he's either too poor to buy it or else amazingly, painfully cheap. (Yes, there ARE corporate IT people who are that cheap. They pay for their foolishness daily, but they don't have to write up purchase orders for those expenses, so they seem happy. Let them eat cake...)
By the way, IDE on motherboard controllers isn't quite the same beast as if you buy a decent one, and a decent one is still damned cheap. Yes, for large disk arrays, SCSI still has an edge. However, talking about large disk arrays on commodity hardware is an indication that you are either clueless or like wasting money.
By Anonymous Coward () on
Comments
By Nobody You'd Know () on
And yes, you -can- hear the difference with vinyl. Every scratch, every imperfection in the pressing, every extra bit of hiss added by the mechanical nature of the system. Some "audiophiles" are stupid enough to think that the last of those is "warmth" or some similar attribute that they claim CDs don't have. It is true that CDs don't sound like records - because they're an -accurate- reproduction instead of a shoddy approximation. However, I realize that there are people out there who've built hobbies, careers, and even egos out of denying this fact, and that they are not going to change their minds just because reality disagrees with them. In some cases, it is a sense of "the good old days," in some cases, a desire to maintain a feeling of elitism(the obnoxious part of "audiophiles," to be sure,) and in some cases, it is merely a desire to seem "interesting" or "different." Adherents of such religions are probably interesting to sociologists, but I'm sick of them, myself.
By Dave Uhring () duhring@charter.net on mailto:duhring@charter.net
Comments
By Josh () woodrow@activecom.net on mailto:woodrow@activecom.net
Comments
By Dave Uhring () duhring@charter.net on mailto:duhring@charter.net
Comments
By Nobody You'd Know () on
development kernels are they starting to get a
system that handles heavy load well, and there are still problems to be resolved. Yes, I think they'll resolve them. Even though I'm a BSD guy, I -hope- they resolve them. I think we all benefit when there are as many high quality systems available as possible.
That's a point that seems to be lost on many people. Free software may be a competition of sorts, but it is not an economic competition. You don't "beat" the next guy by putting him out of business, and your continued survival is not at stake if someone else's code is better at one particular test than yours as of right now - so why do so many advocates sound like Baptist missionaries, out to save your soul? Really, really lame.
By Alex Farber () farber@cpan.org on http://simplex.ru/news/rus/
I am trying to install OpenBSD and get
the error message "ne1: device timeout".
Probably because my NE2000-card has io=0x300
and irq=12, and not 10 how the boot message
mistakenly says... Does anyone have an advice?
Can I specify the irq at the "mdeia directives"-
prompt?
Thank you
Alex
Comments
By Alex Farber () farber@cpan.org on http://simplex.ru/news/rus/
uses IRQ=5, since IRQ=12 is my PS/2 mouse.
Everything works fine under Debian (potato) Linux.
I have tried "boot -c" at the boot prompt and
have been able to connect to the net. But after
the installation I can not boot from the hard
disk - everything stops after "ne1: .... irq 10".
Booting from official CD's works fine however...
Does anyone have an idea?
Comments
By Alex Farber () farber@cpan.org on http://simplex.ru/news/rus/
tried booting with "boot -c" and "verbose":
>>> probing for ne1
>>> probing for ne1 succeded
ne1 at isa0 port 0x300/32 irq 10
ne1: NE2000 Ethernet
ne1: address 00:40:34:26:6f:f2
>>> probing for ne2
>>> probing for ne2 failed
>>> probing for we0
>>> probing for we0 failed
>>> probing for we1
>>> probing for we1 failed
>>> probing for ec0
>>> probing for ec0 failed
>>> probing for eg0
Okay, irq 10 for my NE2000-card is wrong,
but booting stops after ">>> probing for eg0".
What could I do? Thank you
/Alex
Comments
By Alex Farber () farber@cpan.org on http://simplex.ru/news/rus/
posts: I've solved that, thanks
/Alex
By Ragnar Beer () rbeer@uni-goettingen.de on mailto:rbeer@uni-goettingen.de
Comments
By Jeff () jeff@cepheid.org on mailto:jeff@cepheid.org
threaded, and on your OpenBSD box unthreaded?
That would probably be one of the biggest
losses (if its the case), otherwise mysql
might have some optimization tricks on Linux.
Comments
By Ragnar Beer^ () rbeer@uni-goettingen.de on mailto:rbeer@uni-goettingen.de
By jdube () jdube on jdube
Comments
By Nobody You'd Know () on
It is one thing to -talk- about your cool new system, or write a version suitable for a few guys to hack on here and there. It is quite another thing to produce something genuinely useful to a significant number of people. In short, no matter how promising a system seems, wait to proclaim it as a future contender for significant usage until it at least has some users who aren't also developers or testers.
So far, "traditional" unixes have been around for roughly 30 years, and nobody has even come close to making a serious competitor in the eyes of anyone but developers of new systems and enthusiasts for anything and everything new.