Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-11 Thread Philip Newton
Greg McCarroll wrote: * Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: AFAIK Samba implements the SMB protocol, which is the native resource (file, printer, ...) sharing protocol of Windows. So if you have Windows, you've already got an SMB client and server running. for the same reasons

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-09 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Greg McCarroll wrote on Freitag, 8. Juni 2001 11:11 And some pieces of software just wont be able to be plugged in - why can't i run Samba on Windows? Why would you want to? * in a heterogeneous network i may want to standardise on a single

Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Jonathan Peterson
At the end of the day, the simple fact is that Windows 2000 crashes more frequently than *n[ui]x does -- this surely is unquestioned fact. I just questioned it. Win2k appears to be a very nice OS, although I've never used it at the server end. It may have all sorts of scalability issues and

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Jonathan Peterson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: At the end of the day, the simple fact is that Windows 2000 crashes more frequently than *n[ui]x does -- this surely is unquestioned fact. I just questioned it. Win2k appears to be a very nice OS, although I've never used it at the server

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Dean ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: There is entirely to much DLL upgrading for my liking at every possible chance with Windows software/service pack. I don't believe that this can really lead to a stable system. Win2k address a lot of these issues with its dll and system file

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Struan Donald
* at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-) arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out .. have you been using [x{0,1]]emacs again ... ? and thus

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Robin Szemeti
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Struan Donald wrote: * at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-) arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out .. have you

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Struan Donald
* at 08/06 11:54 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: pah! .. tis written in the scripture ... 'let he who hath one eye be blessed' .. clearly the 'one eye' is a reference to the one 'i' in vi .. its *obvious* innit ... I shall found my entire religion on this shadowy fact wriiten by our lord himself

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Struan Donald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: * at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-) arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out .. have you

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Philip Newton
Greg McCarroll wrote on Freitag, 8. Juni 2001 11:11 And some pieces of software just wont be able to be plugged in - why can't i run Samba on Windows? Why would you want to? AFAIK Samba implements the SMB protocol, which is the native resource (file, printer, ...) sharing protocol of

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Chris Benson
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 10:11:13AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote: * GUI I really don't want to have a server running a GUI, it adds at least some overhead, encourages people to `work on the server' and as its an additional process may add additional security concerns. And

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-07 Thread Simon Wistow
Ian Brayshaw wrote: What I'm trying to find is industry evidence of SQueaL's performance (or lack of). The more gory the details the better. It's not unbiased and you have to sift through the cruft but checking old Ask-Slashdots is often worth doing as the occasional person comes up with

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-07 Thread Roger Burton West
On or about Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 04:58:11PM -0700, Paul Makepeace typed: At the end of the day, the simple fact is that Windows 2000 crashes more frequently than *n[ui]x does -- this surely is unquestioned fact. Bear in mind also this item from Monday's RISKS (21.44): Date: Tue, 29 May 2001

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-07 Thread Ian Brayshaw
Hi guys, Thanks for the input. I'll investigate further, but it has confirmed my suspicions that SQueaL hasn't made an impact at the terabyte level. As for the job, it's good, but not the be-all and end-all. I'm too passionate about what I do to work on systems that I don't believe in.

Re: Big Shiny Toys (was: Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-07 Thread Elaine -HFB- Ashton
Dominic Mitchell [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *AFAIK, the starfire (Sun Ultra Enterprise 1) only goes up to 64 *processors (I used to work on an under equipped one ;-) The SGI *challenge does 128 procs, though. The starfile does, indeed, max out at 16 boards with 4 processors each making

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Robin Szemeti
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001, Ian Brayshaw wrote: I'm working for a telecoms company that is considering a proposal to move its billing system from Oracle on Solaris, to SQueaLServer NT. It's a decision that is coming from management (where else?), and I'm trying to find out if it's as ludicrous

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Ian Brayshaw
Robin Szemeti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2001, Ian Brayshaw wrote: I'm working for a telecoms company that is considering a proposal to move its billing system from Oracle on Solaris, to SQueaLServer NT. It's a decision that is coming from management (where else?), and I'm

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Redvers Davies
I didn't even reallise you could get NT for serious mips .. I though it only ran on likkle PC things ... The transactions world record sadly is held by M$ at the moment. Red

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Leon Brocard
Redvers Davies sent the following bits through the ether: The transactions world record sadly is held by M$ at the moment. http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-ttperf.idc Leon -- Leon Brocard.http://www.astray.com/ Iterative

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Leon Brocard
Ian Brayshaw sent the following bits through the ether: If it goes through, this is one coder that will be seeking alternate employment (along with the rest of the company). It's probably worth letting the company know about this, although they'll probably ignore it. FUD works, you know...

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Ian Brayshaw
Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Redvers Davies sent the following bits through the ether: The transactions world record sadly is held by M$ at the moment. http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-ttperf.idc Yeah, seen that. It's interesting to note that SQueaL doesn't make an appearance at

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Robin Szemeti
On Thu, 07 Jun 2001, Ian Brayshaw wrote: I didn't even reallise you could get NT for serious mips .. I though it only ran on likkle PC things ... I wouldn't have used the word ran ... I did put something about htat but deleted it .. I leave it in next time. I have worked on Solaris boxen

Re: M$ SQueaLServer

2001-06-06 Thread Paul Makepeace
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:24:35AM +1000, Ian Brayshaw wrote: Have any of you worked with SQueaLServer with a large DB (multiple terabyte level), serving high volume transactions (read write, of the order of You'd have to be more specific than that. MS's terraserver