Re: More benchmark bullshit, and Linux luser mating calls... (was Re: Linux betas NT in TPC testing, running Oracle8

In article <7g5aa4$8o$1_at_nnrp03.primenet.com>, Stephen Edwards <ja207030_at_primenet.com> wrote:

>: Downtime is downtime. Stability means running. I take it you haven't
>
>No. Stability means that the operating system doesn't crash. Just
>because I reboot an OS, doesn't make it unstable. If I have to boot SCO
>UNIX 3 or four times in one month, that means "it has to be rebooted to
>relink the kernel because I added stuff to it, etc.", not "it's unstable."
>What you're saying does not make any sense.

It is a simple question. Is the server running and are the users getting their work done? If you are rebooting, they aren't. If another operating system could have been reconfigured on the fly then the downtime could have been avoided.

>: of people with changing needs yet. It doesn't generally matter
>: to them why the server isn't running.
>
>So, you're saying that the definition of stability == that of what the
>lusers perceive?... scary.

And you consider it to be a plaything to turn off whenever you want? That's my definition of a 'personal' computer, not a server. There are times you don't have any choice but I don't see why anyone would choose an operationg system that takes your choices away for every little thing.

  Les Mikesell
    les_at_mcs.com Received on Tue Apr 27 1999 - 23:46:23 CEST