For the clustering thing, I agree that their information is incorrect.
But Linux does take a long long time to boot if it is cold-rebooted. If
you hit the power switch on an NT box, it takes the same amount of time to
boot as it does if you didn't do that. And the file structure remains intact,
save for files that may have been opened prior to the reboot.
Linux forces a file system check and has lots of things to fix when this
occurs. On a large drive with lots of files, this takes a *really* long time.
Alas... the writer fails to point out that if you are using clustering, who
cares how long it takes to boot when other machines are there to take over the
reigns while the rebooted one gets its act together.
Steven's claim here seems to say that Linux Beowulf outperforms NT clustering.
I have never seen stats on this. Do they exist? As for the dual pentium.. the
article did not say that it wont work... it used the term "full fledged
support". Linux has only very basic support for dual processors. NT has the
whole shebang, and can be tuned til the cows come home. Linux will get there...
The article was nitpicky at most, and definitely selective in its reporting, but
the only thing that isn't true in it is the clustering statement. But then
again... what does it take to cluster a bunch of NT machines, and what does it
take to cluster a bunch of Linux machines?
Laters,
Karsten Johansson
"Steven T. Hatton" wrote:
>
> Hmmm. Didn't we recently read about an IBM multi-processor machine running
> The Big Blue Penguin (or whatever they call their flavor of Linux) which blew
> the freakin' doors off anything MS has ever made?
>
> Steve
>
> Michael Merritt wrote:
>
> > Karsten Johansson wrote:
> > >
> > > Ewan Dunbar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 12 Apr 1999, Fred A. Miller wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This is DEAD wrong in a lot of areas...but, you should read it.
> > > > Where? I haven't found any problems with it. WAY better than that WSJ
> > > > article.
> > >
> > > Yes, I fail to see where it is dead wrong... especially in a "lot" of
> > > areas. Please explain.
> >
> > Well, take the paragraph:
> > "Missing from Linux are high-availability features that would let one
> > Linux server step in and take over if another failed; full-fledged
> > support for computers with multiple
> > processors; and a "journaling" file system that is necessary to quickly
> > reboot a crashed machine without having to laboriously reconstruct the
> > computer's system files, the study said."
> >
> > Is Beowulf merely a figment of my imagination? As well as many other
> > clustering solutions. Try doing half of that with NT.
> >
> > Also, my server does quite well using its dual processors -- I'm not
> > sure how much more support is needed to be "full-fledged?"
______________________________________________________
Get your free web-based email at http://www.xoom.com
Birthday? Anniversary? Send FREE animated greeting
cards for any occassion at http://greetings.xoom.com
--
To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
archive at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
