Re: Just a thank you.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 06:09:05PM -0700 or thereabouts, Benjamin Heath wrote: Hi, This seems non-sequitur somehow, but I would simply like thank all the developers of OpenBSD for continuing work on the only OS that I really trust. I learn plenty just by lurking on this list. I also appreciate having a set of developers with the fortitude to entirely reject very flawed systems, and I like that simply because someone has to. Just thanks. Ben. +1. Totally agree. I have now completely abandoned linux. Thanks Hugely Maurice
Re: Just a thank you.
Ditto! On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Maurice McCarthy m...@mythic-beasts.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 06:09:05PM -0700 or thereabouts, Benjamin Heath wrote: Hi, This seems non-sequitur somehow, but I would simply like thank all the developers of OpenBSD for continuing work on the only OS that I really trust. I learn plenty just by lurking on this list. I also appreciate having a set of developers with the fortitude to entirely reject very flawed systems, and I like that simply because someone has to. Just thanks. Ben. +1. Totally agree. I have now completely abandoned linux. Thanks Hugely Maurice
Just a thank you.
Hi, This seems non-sequitur somehow, but I would simply like thank all the developers of OpenBSD for continuing work on the only OS that I really trust. I learn plenty just by lurking on this list. I also appreciate having a set of developers with the fortitude to entirely reject very flawed systems, and I like that simply because someone has to. Just thanks. Ben.
just a 'thank you' ;)
Hi Last month I installed OpenBSD 3.7 on an Intel P4 2.8GHz, 512MB RAM, Intel server board (E7221) and four intel NICs (two fxp and two em) It's used as an intranet router for a campus (PIM TV multicast with xorp, squid and sometimes snort) routing between different parts of the campus and preventing unwanted traffic to pass between them. (and routing outgoing traffic to another obenbsd router connected to internet) There are approx. 600 users (student WIN boxes and some servers (game/samba) )on the LAN and the load on the machine is 20% max. (with snort running) A friend of mine maintains similar LAN with similar HW. (but has a desktop MSI board (intel 865 chipset) with realtek and 3com NICs, the same processor etc...) with Debian His machine (with cca the same throughput) running squid and xorp has 70% load, forget about snort. I'm wondering why there's so big difference. Maybe NIC or chipset together with OS ;) Anyway, I'm absolutely satisfied with all my OBSD machines. Great work. Peter Huncar IT manager GTS Slovakia s.r.o. Liscie udolie 5 841 02 Bratislava * tel: (+421) (2) 57781 101 fax: (+421) (2) 57781 117 cell: (+421) 905 580 724
Re: just a 'thank you' ;)
On Friday 05 August 2005 09:01 am, Peter Huncar wrote: Hi [snip comparison of 2 different systems with different hardware and different services that result in a different load] Replacing the NIC's with em or some other well designed gigabit card might help if his interrupt count are high, but I would personally start by offloading squid onto a separate server. (You didn't list squid as running on your server and squid can eat up a lot of resources.) Tim Donahue
Re: just a 'thank you' ;)
* Timothy Donahue [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-05 18:06]: Replacing the NIC's with em or some other well designed gigabit card em is not a well designed gigabit card. might help if his interrupt count are high not at all, there is no int mitigation on em. well, the hardware supports it, but there's so many bugs that it is turned off - at least here, not sure what linux does. -- BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/ OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ... Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: just a 'thank you' ;)
On Friday 05 August 2005 12:09 pm, Henning Brauer wrote: * Timothy Donahue [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-05 18:06]: Replacing the NIC's with em or some other well designed gigabit card em is not a well designed gigabit card. might help if his interrupt count are high not at all, there is no int mitigation on em. well, the hardware supports it, but there's so many bugs that it is turned off - at least here, not sure what linux does. Henning, I'm sure this is a stupid question but are the int mitigation problems generic or specific to the em line? Would a sk based card work better? Tim Donahue
Re: just a 'thank you' ;)
* Timothy Donahue [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-05 19:21]: On Friday 05 August 2005 12:09 pm, Henning Brauer wrote: * Timothy Donahue [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-05 18:06]: Replacing the NIC's with em or some other well designed gigabit card em is not a well designed gigabit card. might help if his interrupt count are high not at all, there is no int mitigation on em. well, the hardware supports it, but there's so many bugs that it is turned off - at least here, not sure what linux does. Henning, I'm sure this is a stupid question but are the int mitigation problems generic or specific to the em line? hardware bugs in em Would a sk based card work better? yes, they have pretty much perfect int mitigation -- BS Web Services, http://www.bsws.de/ OpenBSD-based Webhosting, Mail Services, Managed Servers, ... Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
