Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 08:31:46 -0800 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: kalts@estpak.ee Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>, David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "leak" in softupdates? Message-ID: <200303070831.46495.wes@softweyr.com> In-Reply-To: <20030307160147.GA3422@kevad.internal> References: <20030305204526.T38115@hub.org> <200303070648.26984.wes@softweyr.com> <20030307160147.GA3422@kevad.internal>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 07 March 2003 08:01, Vallo Kallaste wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 06:48:26AM -0800, Wes Peters
>
> <wes@softweyr.com> wrote:
> > > > putting real challenge to VM. All this means that FreeBSD
> > > > isn't ready to enterprise yet, no matter what advocacy has to
> > > > say. I'm glad Marc hasn't gave up and every now-and-then sends
> > > > the findings out to lists, for the benefit of others,
> > > > particularly developers. One word about "enterprise"; I'm sure
> > > > Yahoo and similar big players run also FreeBSD on "big boxes",
> > > > but they have real engineers in the field and have customised
> > > > installations, I guess. Off-the-shelf FreeBSD isn't ready yet.
> >
> > Off-the-shelf FreeBSD is about as good as most commercial UNIX
> > systems; you seem to have either overestimated their ability to
> > handle loads that are absurd for the hardware or have had a much
> > better experience than I have.
>
> It's more like I have too high expectations for FreeBSD, probably.
> You are right I guess, but all this talk about system auto-tuning
> for high capacity systems has not progressed to reality, as far as I
> know. The talk comes up occasionally and after some discussion about
> the benefits of such auto-tuning, dies off. Lack of manpower I
> guess, so I shut up. But that's the point why I made the
> "enterprise" comment.
A lot depends on the size of the "enterprise" as well. I'm once again
building embedded FreeBSD systems, but the tuning requirements on this
one are wildly different from the last one.
Here we're spec'ing the next generation of our hardware, which will
probably be PIII embedded for longevity and pushing the vendors to make
sure they'll support all the way up to the 1.26 GHz clock, though we'll
probably ship about 800 MHz to start. Most of these systems are based
on the Intel reference design and have only one DIMM slot, so we get
256M or 512M SDRAM.
At my last gig, we were pushing P4s at 2.4 GHz to their limits and
looking into PAE so we could cram 16GB RAM onto the board. (They ended
up moving to Linux for the PAE support, which turned out to not really
get them what they needed, but it's no longer my problem. ;^)
One of these may seem more enterprise-y to you, but both are "bet the
company" hardware decisions for the respective companies, and designed
to be installed in the customers enterprise data center -- just
different sized customers.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters wes@softweyr.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200303070831.46495.wes>