If I understand them correctly, Netcraft measures uptime by uptime of the site in question. If you've got a cluster of web servers all responding for the same web site, the site will be up as long as there is a server to respond for it, even if individual cluster members fail.
On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 13:22, Shannon Roddy wrote: > What I want to know is how in the hell Verio is getting >1000 days > uptime on Win2k/IIS5???? There must be something going on that lies??? > They must have had to reboot at some point to put in patches??? This > just doesn't make sense to me. Either that or their system must be > vulnerable as hell? ANyone have clue? > > If the numbers are real I hope they are paying that sysadmin >100k a > year, because he has performed a feat I thought was not possible! > > Shannon > > John Hebert wrote: > > >"We're seeing crazy uptime numbers now, like three months, six months. I > >fully expect we'll see a year of uptime when Windows Server 2003 is > >finished," said Jeff Stucky, senior systems engineer on the Microsoft.com > >operations team on this Microsoft page . > > > >Uptimes of three months is crazy? Then Unix must be absolutely > >stark-raving-mad-running-in-traffic insane: > > > >http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html > > > >John Hebert > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Glenn Rumfellow > >To: Technical Group > >Sent: 4/25/03 7:36 AM > >Subject: Ballmer users in Windows 2003 Server > > > >I especially liked the last few paragraphs: > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/30395.html > > <<The Register.url>> > > > >_______________________________________________ > >General mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
