Re: [OT] 2.6 kernel

On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 11:09:26AM -0700, joe scribbled:
> William Lovaton wrote:
> 
> >Cool!
> >
> >I guess that a server is stable (not only 2.6) just when it is doing
> >very specific tasks.  In my case it runs an enterprise web app with
> >Apache, PHP, Oracle (The DB is in another server).  Around 900
> >concurrent users.  This is 99.9% of the usage pattern.
> > 
> >
> Well, IMHO, using a Linux server for just one thing is usually a waste 
> of a Linux box. ;)
Well, IMNSHO, using a server for more than one task is generally a sign of
bad infrastructure design (if you can afford to invest in infrastructure, of
course).

> Most of the installations we've done in small business environments have 
> a single Linux server doing many things: firewall/vpn server, smtp 
> server w/ spam/virus detection, pop3 mail, webmail, ntp, dhcp, dns, web 
> server and/or web proxy.
Good luck. I suppose the machines don't have serious kind of traffic going
through them.

> Lately we've been deploying a spam quarantine management system called 
> maia mailguard, which uses apache, php, perl, amavisd, clamav, 
> spamassassin, and mysql, so the machines are getting a good workout, and 
> the 2.6 kernel has been solid and a good performer.
Good workout... Are the machines pumping out, say, 40Mb/s of scatterred
traffic, plus say 20k mails a day?

> YMMV, but everything I've seen lately has been all good.
I would get suspicious then. If something goes too well, then there are
problems lurking somewhere.

marek

_______________________________________________
tux-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/tux-list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBgT2yq3909GIf5uoRAkvMAJ4r/2uRjBNJHCsKjaT2FpjyjNz1mQCdEjKm
olim0T5ooqoxe1I6m38c5hY=
=5zMl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----