Slashdot rejects "BSD is NOT dying" article

Robert Watson rwatson at
Sun Sep 28 20:57:40 PDT 2003

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, Mike Hoskins wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Michal Pasternak wrote:
> > Well, just make sure to click each domain and see, what do the guys behind
> > it really do ;) I am perfectly sure, that their boxes work quite much
> > everyday.
> that's what the load balancer bit refered to...  my point was there are
> lots of technologies out there that can make a given URI look highly
> available without having anything much at all to do with the underlying
> operating system of the hosts themselves. 
> i'm a BSD fan, and we do quite well in the stats...  that's good, and
> i'm glad to see it.  i'm just pointing out that "uptime" alone can give
> results that don't really say much about the site's OS of choice.  big
> sites like Dell and M$ run mostly IIS installs these days...  they don't
> achieve uptime (from a user's or netcraft's perspective) due to the
> merits of their OS/product. 

I'm actually far less interested in the "uptime" stats than in the "number
of host" stats -- an area where load balancers hurt numbers rather than
helping :-). 

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert at      Network Associates Laboratories

More information about the freebsd-advocacy mailing list