Hello!
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 09:23:39PM -0400, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Wijnand Wiersma wrote:
On 4/5/06, Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sick and tired of this OpenBSD doesn't perform well FUD. It is
nothing but FUD or over-generalization.
Well, I don't entirely agree.
At some tasks
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 07:03:00PM +0200, Hannah Schroeter wrote:
Hello!
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 09:23:39PM -0400, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Wijnand Wiersma wrote:
On 4/5/06, Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sick and tired of this OpenBSD doesn't perform well FUD. It is
nothing but
* Miles Keaton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-06 03:57]:
Wondering... since I brought up MySQL, and a few people (thanks
Henning!) said MySQL in particular has problems, I didn't mention that
we're about to ditch MySQL anyway, and complete our conversion to
PostgreSQL, so I wonder...
good move :)
Hi!
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 04:29:40PM -0600, Chris 'Xenon' Hanson wrote:
Hannah Schroeter wrote:
IIRC there're consultants offering commercial services around OpenBSD,
too. So you could've hired one to fix the Broadcom problem of yours,
just like you paid for Nortel's on-site troubleshooting.
On Apr 5, 2006, at 3:30 PM, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Fine, but wasn't your requirements here the cheapest solutions, not
the platform on witch it run? I don't know that, only you do. But
may be there was and is a very nice solutions working on OpenBSD,
but that was just more expensive and
Donald J. Ankney wrote:
If you're working for an employer where cost (both initial and TCO) are
not part of the solution criteria, are they hiring?
Well, in all fairness to this statement, I have an unfair advantage. I
own both business I operate, so I make the choice and live with the
On 4/5/06, David T Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just out of curiosity why did your company decide
to go with Postgresql as opposed to mysql?
Just somewhat curious considering you see mysql
everywhere these days...
http://sql-info.de/mysql/gotchas.html
Or at least you hear about it more
real question for you heavy users of OpenBSD in
big/production/heavy-traffic situations:
When would you NOT use OpenBSD?
There's only one (IMO) place to not use OpenBSD...when its on the
desktop and you need a driver to be productive. I'm using debian and
-current
on my laptop for this reason
The answer is very simple: When I have to run Windows programs.
Support skills is very relevant to the question. Various early
comments have used the phrase It all depends on the right tool
for the job. That phrase is not the whole story.
Every time you add a new OS to the mix, the support
When would you NOT use OpenBSD?
When would you choose one of the other *nix over OpenBSD?
I'm NOT using OpenBSD on my laptop, it's powered by FreeBSD instead.
Basically this is due to lack of acpi and bluetooth support in OpenBSD.
even get back to our old
situation of being 100% OpenBSD for everything.
Which leads me to my real question for you heavy users of OpenBSD in
big/production/heavy-traffic situations:
When would you NOT use OpenBSD?
When would you choose one of the other *nix over OpenBSD?
Is OpenBSD
Hello Chris,
On Wed, 05.04.2006 at 04:55:39 +0200, Chris Alatakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
holding more than 30 domain names some with lot of traffic almost
what is a lot of traffic?
unpatched and unupdated (3.2 stable). I bet if I left it there unpatched
for the next 5 years I will not
well, If you are not happy with the SMP performance in FreeBSD you
won't be in OpenBSD either.
Also, MySQL performance is worse in OpenBSD due to the threading
library used, I would suggest to wait at least until rthreads are
complete and stable if you must make the switch nevertheless.
* Joachim Schipper [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-05 10:44]:
OpenBSD just isn't the fastest around
actually, we are.
for quite some stuff.
we're not for some other stuff.
--
BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/
OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ...
Unix is very simple, but
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 12:11:49PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
actually, we are.
for quite some stuff.
the install for one. i love the install. 8-)
tor
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 12:11:49PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-05 10:44]:
OpenBSD just isn't the fastest around
actually, we are.
for quite some stuff.
we're not for some other stuff.
Okay, that's true. Good correction.
Still, for MySQL and
* Joachim Schipper [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-05 13:22]:
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 12:11:49PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-05 10:44]:
OpenBSD just isn't the fastest around
actually, we are.
for quite some stuff.
we're not for some other
Additionally, hardware support is not as good as from, say, Linux. Or
even FreeBSD. And if the hardware is not supported, an OpenBSD box
doesn't do a whole lot of good.
Really?
So having a crappy or blobbed driver is better than having nothing?
I disagree vehemently .
Give me something that
On Apr 5, 2006, at 8:04 AM, Marco Peereboom wrote:
Additionally, hardware support is not as good as from, say, Linux. Or
even FreeBSD. And if the hardware is not supported, an OpenBSD box
doesn't do a whole lot of good.
Really?
So having a crappy or blobbed driver is better than having
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 07:04:45AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
Additionally, hardware support is not as good as from, say, Linux. Or
even FreeBSD. And if the hardware is not supported, an OpenBSD box
doesn't do a whole lot of good.
Really?
So having a crappy or blobbed driver is better
Actually, I agree. I originally had OpenBSD 3.6
installed on an i386 AT box with a SoundBlaster sound card.
The sound quality was rather soft, until I pumped the audio
to max (and I'm not hard of hearing).
However, the dvd drive worked perfectly under mplayer.
Having, never tried slackware, I
I'm not saying that having a blobbed driver in-tree would be an
improvement - however, a machine that runs is likely to be an
improvement over one that doesn't, at least for a while (because, as
pointed out, bugs like blobs).
bzzzt *wrong*
There is a whole market out there for this. It's
I run OpenBSD for almost anything that is exposed to insecure digital spaces,
like the
Internet, that needs to be seriously hardened. I run and Linux (or god forbid,
Windows) on
servers that can be a little soft because they are only exposed to trusted
access.
My company's main websites
Antonios Anastasiadis wrote:
well, If you are not happy with the SMP performance in FreeBSD you
won't be in OpenBSD either.
Also, MySQL performance is worse in OpenBSD due to the threading
library used, I would suggest to wait at least until rthreads are
complete and stable if you must make the
On Apr 5, 2006, at 11:55 AM, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
I am of the opinion like many here that use what's for the job
This is something that can't be stressed enough -- always use the
tool that's most appropriate for the job.
OpenBSD can do everything other operating systems do. It's where I
I'm not saying that having a blobbed driver in-tree would be an
improvement - however, a machine that runs is likely to be an
improvement over one that doesn't, at least for a while (because, as
pointed out, bugs like blobs).
I prefer looking at what's supported first and asked questions on the
Donald J. Ankney wrote:
Vendor support is a sometimes criteria.
Well, if the Vendor support is so critical, then you will be better
served with OpenBSD for what they provide in their default system and
that's second to none! By far!
Anytime I had any problem that was specific to
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
I'm not saying that having a blobbed driver in-tree would be an
improvement - however, a machine that runs is likely to be an
improvement over one that doesn't, at least for a while (because, as
pointed out, bugs like blobs).
I prefer looking at what's supported first
As to the blobbed drivers, is it better to fail early when there are options
or later after you have committed? Makes a good open question.
Better not to run at all if it is wrong and not design properly. This
way, you don't waist many days trying to figure it out, or worst, loose
very
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Donald J. Ankney wrote:
Vendor support is a sometimes criteria.
Well, if the Vendor support is so critical, then you will be better
served with OpenBSD for what they provide in their default system and
that's second to none! By far!
snip
Again do as you see
On Apr 5, 2006, at 1:01 PM, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Donald J. Ankney wrote:
Vendor support is a sometimes criteria.
Well, if the Vendor support is so critical, then you will be better
served with OpenBSD for what they provide in their default system
and that's second to none! By far!
Dan wrote:
While I generally agree with most of what Daniel says, I have to
disagree here. I believe Donald's approach is correct...the right tool
for the job. Sometimes the ability to call technical support for a
product is critical.
Just like I said. Yes use the right tools for the job.
--- Daniel Ouellet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, the argument of Vendor support is a sometimes criteria. really
doesn't mean ANYTHING to me anymore and real life example proved it many
times over!
Paid vendor support is a feel good thing like insurance. When it comes time
for them to help
Hi!
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 05:00:23PM -0400, Dan wrote:
[...]
With a vendor (Nortel) I can leverage our existing relationship and get
things done. I've had issues get escalated to Senior VP level at
Nortel*that* gets things done. Nortel has sent engineers on site
for some very strange
Hannah Schroeter wrote:
IIRC there're consultants offering commercial services around OpenBSD,
too. So you could've hired one to fix the Broadcom problem of yours,
just like you paid for Nortel's on-site troubleshooting.
Not to inflame the issue, but this isn't as solid of an argument as it
Donald J. Ankney wrote:
The cheapest solution I could find for a fibre-channel SAN was Apple's
XSAN.
Fine, but wasn't your requirements here the cheapest solutions, not the
platform on witch it run? I don't know that, only you do. But may be
there was and is a very nice solutions working on
On 4/5/06, Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sick and tired of this OpenBSD doesn't perform well FUD. It is
nothing but FUD or over-generalization.
Well, I don't entirely agree.
At some tasks OpenBSD feels sluggish, X performs much slower for
example then on *sigh* Linux *sigh*.
But
Slightly offtopic, but ironically a related-page that showed up for
this thread is
SAP Selects SSH Tectia for Secure Server Access
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060403/sfm116.html?.v=32 and talks about
[bleh]total cost of ownership[/bleh], extensive product evaluations,
competing solutions --
Original message
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 02:37:48 +0200
From: Martin Schrvder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: When would you NOT use OpenBSD?
To: misc@openbsd.org
On 2006-04-05 19:52:16 -0400, Nick Guenther wrote:
Slightly offtopic, but ironically a related-page that showed up
Wijnand Wiersma wrote:
On 4/5/06, Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sick and tired of this OpenBSD doesn't perform well FUD. It is
nothing but FUD or over-generalization.
Well, I don't entirely agree.
At some tasks OpenBSD feels sluggish, X performs much slower for
example then on
On Thursday 06 April 2006 06:29, Chris 'Xenon' Hanson wrote:
If one could guarantee that the person who wrote the problematic code
were always available as a consultant, the analogy might be closer, but
frequently that's not the case. Even a commercialized open source OS like
Red Hat Linux
On Thursday 06 April 2006 05:00, Dan wrote:
I recently had a problem with an OBSD router that had been running for
months, then one network card started locking up (an onboard Broadcom).
Completely swapped the server...same issue. I posted the information to
the list, with the appropriate
Thanks everyone for all of your feedback.
Since we're not using any strange hardware (just regular Opteron/Xeon
SCSI servers with LSI MegaRaid cards), and since we never expect
commerical support, then I guess that answers that.
Wondering... since I brought up MySQL, and a few people (thanks
On Apr 5, 2006, at 9:24 PM, Lars Hansson wrote:
On Thursday 06 April 2006 05:00, Dan wrote:
I recently had a problem with an OBSD router that had been running
for
months, then one network card started locking up (an onboard
Broadcom).
Completely swapped the server...same issue. I posted
Chris 'Xenon' Hanson wrote:
Hannah Schroeter wrote:
IIRC there're consultants offering commercial services around OpenBSD,
too. So you could've hired one to fix the Broadcom problem of yours,
just like you paid for Nortel's on-site troubleshooting.
Not to inflame the issue, but this isn't
Just out of curiosity why did your company decide
to go with Postgresql as opposed to mysql?
Just somewhat curious considering you see mysql
everywhere these days...
Or at least you hear about it more it seems...
me to my real question for you heavy users of OpenBSD in
big/production/heavy-traffic situations:
When would you NOT use OpenBSD?
When would you choose one of the other *nix over OpenBSD?
Is OpenBSD appropriate for a busy webserver or super-loaded database server?
I've seen old O.S. shootouts
Lars Hansson wrote:
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 06:25, Miles Keaton wrote:
When would you NOT use OpenBSD?
When you run applications that *REALLY* needs SMP, not that there are a lot of
those.
Or when your application simply do not run on OpenBSD for some reason.
When would you
48 matches
Mail list logo
