Slashdot rejects "BSD is NOT dying" article
rwatson at freebsd.org
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
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert at fledge.watson.org Network Associates Laboratories
More information about the freebsd-advocacy