Subject: Re: NetBSD uptime !
To: Greg Troxel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Ed Wensell III <email@example.com>
Date: 05/03/2007 05:58:30
--- Greg Troxel <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > How can maintain a high uptime, when severals patches
> > are enabled in a time period or maybe in a stable
> > version ?
> One would have to develop a way to change the code on a running system,
> so that could get the fixed code without a reboot.
Or you run multiple servers...
The cited "uptime" is based on the availability of a website hosted on a
given platform, not the uptime of specific servers. Because of the web's
transactional nature, it's possible to host a website using a multiple
server backend. If one of the systems goes down (crashes, patches, etc),
requests are redirected to the remaining systems. The perceived
availability of the site is maintained.
In all honesty, this is more a function of system administration and is
NOT a trait of any specific platform. While I'd love to see more NetBSD
use, I hope no-one overhauls their entire infrastructure based on this one
Also, I suspect the uptime is skewed due to number of Windows/Linux
systems versus NetBSD. Without any information to the contrary, I would
guess that the majority of the 298 NetBSD systems in the statistic are
hobbyist or otherwise low-load systems, whereas the Windows/Linux numbers
probably contains more corporate servers which are pushed to their brink.
Is it fair to compare the uptime of my relatively low-use home NetBSD
system with Google?
Ed Wensell III
24/7 support is only available for 3.428571 hours per day.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around