Re: postnuke work
Tom Hull <[email protected]> Sun, 04 Aug 2002 01:11:05 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.user-groups.aclug.webdev |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Jeff Vian wrote: > > Dale W Hodge wrote: > >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: [email protected] On Behalf Of Tom Hull >>> >>>Of course, if anyone wants to propose a better machine and/or >>>a better connection, we should consider that. > > I have a K6-2 300 CPU I will donate if the existing motherbord will > support it, or if someone can come up with a suitable motherboard. > Also have some memory available. The current machine is a Pentium 133, 128MB RAM (I think that's 4*32, and may be the max), SCSI, 4.3GB disk. The loadavg is currently next to nothing, but it's running 91MB into swap, and has accumulated 9:35 in kswapd (over 128 days). /var is small and at 49%, nothing else is remotely close to running out of disk. mysqld and nsd have >7000 pages of memory; postmaster has much less. >>No suggestions here. >> >>>Elsewhere, Dale >>>suggested using debian instead of the current krud/red hat >>>system. Biggest problem I see with that is that it would wipe >>>out a lot of reusable configuration on the current machine; >>>OTOH, it may be a good idea for a new machine. (Although as >>>a debian non-user I don't know that.) >> >>I only suggest this if we change machines. Debian seems to manage security much >>better than RedHat. Package management is a dream by comparison. Now that >>Debian 3.0 has released, it's a fairly up-to-date system. > > On which system are you saying package management is a dream? > > I don't have any problems with security on RedHat. And it has been very > easy to keep packages up to date and add new ones. > > OTOH, as a non-debian user, I hear debian is usually slower to release > updates because they try to keep it extremely stable and don't release > things until after they have been in use and tested by others for > security and stability. If I was making the decision it would be RedHat, > but that is based on comfort and familiarity with the system. > > AFAIK, unless we have been stressing the existing machine, why does it > need to be upgraded right now? What is the hardware exactly? I thought > it was a pentium 133, and that is old but still seems pretty solid for a > site that is not highly stressed for activity. See above for the hardware. I think that apache+php will stress it a bit more, but there isn't any obvious problem at this point, and nsd+postgres will go away sooner or later. -- /* * Tom Hull * thull2 at cox.net * http://www.tomhull.com/ */