Subject: Re: NetBSD reliability and capabilities
To: Chris Clymer <email@example.com>
From: Andreas Drewke <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/03/2005 08:22:33
The customer who likes to get that box is not preferring a OS. It is just
preferring that box which will make a special job.
On the other side you are a little right and so one question comes in mind:
Why to use NetBSD or why not?
1. I know from benchmarks and personal impression: NetBSD is performing very
well and it gives me the feeling of beeing a well designed and well done OS.
And I am still not sure which linux dist to use :)
2. Linux may perform better thow.
Ok but there is no need to be excited about something, because of course we
will make huge pressuretests on the box anyways. I justed wanted to consider
NetBSD and hear some opinions! Thanx for that.
Maybe I find some time to test both OS. I thing that would be interressting!
I thing that what we call binary linux emulation is nothing else than a
linux-netbsd syscall converter?But you are right, when I typed this
yesterday, it already sounded like a big counter-argument.
But isn't it again a big counter-argument to use a half finished jvm port!
Unfortunatly, this both sounds like big showstoppers.
> You haven't stated what your device is actually doing, so perhaps there
> other advantages to using NBSD. However, it sounds like a chief part of
> is an embedded webserver.
> It seems somewhat foolish to me to have a device you wish 100% uptime on
> run a
> webserver you expect heavy load on in an emulation mode, when you've
> got things ready to go with it in the native OS.
> Without knowing more, it seems logical to either use a NetBSD-native
> webserver, or else to use Linux.
> You should use the best tool for the job, not the one that you personally
> prefer, especially for a product that a lot of other people(paying
> customers!) are going to be using. If the customers prefer Linux, are
> already using the product primarily in Linux, and you are running it in
> only in emulation mode, then logically Linux is the best tool for the job.
> On the other hand, there are certainly embedded products out there running
> NetBSD. That happened to be the right tool for the job in those cases.
> On Wednesday 02 February 2005 1:10 pm, Andreas Drewke wrote:
> > Hallo,
> > i like to ask a serious question.
> > The software company I am working at might make a deal with another
> > to sell server system with a small Flashcard or rom as storage
> > device(approx. 256 or 512mb) where a Unix-like-OS and our Server
> > will be running on.
> > Actually here in company I develop and run the application on NetBSD,
> > customers who bought the product choosed of course their OS - named
> linux -
> > themself, so there is no real prove that my preferred combination works
> > really stable and reliable in Real World Usage (means 100% uptime).
> > I would like to chose NetBSD of course for the OS.
> > But now the questions.
> > 1. Is it possible to run NetBSD/i386 from a CF like storage device(maybe
> > more a question of bios)?
> > 2. Is it possible to run it without graphics card? Is this possible at
> > on x86 hardware (hmm, might depend on bios and hardware I guess too)
> > 2. What about things like swap partitions. There will be enough ram in
> > machine for the task it will do. But does NetBSD prefer a small swap
> > thow to do some VM tasks?
> > 3. Has anyone run a production http server on Java & Java HTTP Server
> > Tomcat reliable, fast(means comparable fast to other unix-like OS)
> > linux emulation layer (I mean a server that really is under pressure of
> > course)
> > 4. Has anybody any other thoughts that comes to mind when reading this?
> > 5. Am I insane just to consider NetBSD?
> > I thing question 3 is the most interessting one....
> > Regards
> > Andreas
www: http://drewke.net / icq:175089452
GMX im TV ... Die Gedanken sind frei ... Schon gesehen?
Jetzt Spot online ansehen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/tv-spot