Article View: comp.sys.powerpc
Article #3347Re: Debate: PowerMac "trounces" Pentium....???
From: Dan Pop
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 22:45
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 22:45
50 lines
3043 bytes
3043 bytes
In <mazulauf-0903961351200001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> mazulauf@atmos.met.utah.edu (Mike Zulauf) writes: >In article <danpop.826236568@rscernix>, danpop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop) wrote: > >> And my main point, which _you_ missed, was that a correctly administrated >> Sun doesn't crash. I backed my point with hard data, from workgroup >> servers which support several users working from X terminals every day. >> Their uptime is now in the forty-something range. > >Let me reiterate this. I find SunOS/Solaris to be reasonably stable. >Certainly much more so than the MacOS. But it can and does crash >occasionally, even on 'correctly administrated' machines. To deny this is >foolishness. Time to reiterate our small test: cnwgs2:~:ROOT 24> rsh -l iss cms1 uptime 11:44pm up 44 day(s), 3:36, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.09, 0.11 cnwgs2:~:ROOT 25> rsh -l iss cms2 uptime 11:44pm up 44 day(s), 6:20, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.11, 0.13 cnwgs2:~:ROOT 26> rsh -l iss cms3 uptime 11:44pm up 45 day(s), 9:27, 3 users, load average: 0.14, 0.09, 0.12 cnwgs2:~:ROOT 27> rsh -l iss cms4 uptime 11:44pm up 45 day(s), 9:24, 3 users, load average: 0.05, 0.09, 0.14 cnwgs2:~:ROOT 28> rsh -l iss cms5 uptime 11:44pm up 44 day(s), 5:05, 4 users, load average: 1.68, 1.76, 1.82 cnwgs2:~:ROOT 29> rsh -l iss cms6 uptime 11:45pm up 45 day(s), 5:56, 2 users, load average: 0.05, 0.09, 0.11 Being midnight, the machines are idle (with one exception) but during normal working hours, they do a lot of number crunching, apart from email, netscape, etc. If you'd give me a recipe to crash them, without root privileges, maybe you'd have a point. I'm not stupid enough to believe that the current version of Solaris is completely bug-free, but these are heavily used machines, yet they've been up since the last reboot, which was done 6.5 weeks ago for administrative reasons. I didn't claim that they'd _never_ crash in any circumstance (only a fool could make such a claim). On the other hand, I proved that these machines don't crash under their current usage as workgroup servers. Dan -- Dan Pop CERN, CN Division Email: danpop@mail.cern.ch Mail: CERN - PPE, Bat. 31 R-004, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<danpop.826497933@rscernix>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!rcp6.elan.af.mil!rscernix!danpopReferences:
<mazulauf-2202962208530001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> <AD580C79-6B2AC@153.37.136.28> <mazulauf-0303961034400001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> <danpop.825958803@rscernix> <mazulauf-0503961125300001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> <danpop.826236568@rscernix> <mazulauf-0903961351200001@grumpy.met.utah.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!rcp6.elan.af.mil!rscernix!danpop From: danpop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop) Newsgroups: comp.sys.powerpc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.intel Subject: Re: Debate: PowerMac "trounces" Pentium....??? Date: 10 Mar 96 22:45:33 GMT Organization: CERN European Lab for Particle Physics Message-ID: <danpop.826497933@rscernix> References: <mazulauf-2202962208530001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> <AD580C79-6B2AC@153.37.136.28> <mazulauf-0303961034400001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> <danpop.825958803@rscernix> <mazulauf-0503961125300001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> <danpop.826236568@rscernix> <mazulauf-0903961351200001@grumpy.met.utah.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: ues5.cern.ch X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #7 (NOV)