From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat May 13 07:52:19 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id HAA02442 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 13 May 1995 07:52:19 -0700 Received: from aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw ([140.109.40.248]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id HAA02434 for ; Sat, 13 May 1995 07:52:15 -0700 Received: (from taob@localhost) by aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw (8.6.11/8.6.9) id WAA00239; Sat, 13 May 1995 22:51:20 +0800 Date: Sat, 13 May 1995 22:51:19 +0800 (CST) From: Brian Tao To: Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?= cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Large installations of FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199505121217.FAA07593@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 12 May 1995, Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?= wrote: > > (1) The machine is "large", i.e., lots of memory/disk, large number of > users/ftp/http connections (e.g., wcarchive, Brian Tao's www site) Keep in mind that my "WWW site" is a *benchmark* only, and one can usually make a case against benchmarks no matter how well-designed they are. I am quite confident that a FreeBSD is in general robust enough to handle heavy server duty, if you give it good equipment on which to run. -- Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org