Re: 90GB table on Windows 2000

Jim Stern wrote:

> With over 1500 NT/Win2000 Servers at FedEx, I can safely say, that
> NT/Win2000 is fine if you enjoy an average uptime of 97%, these machines do
> not support mission critical apps, but are remote data entry sites for upto
> 20 users. Micro$oft itself has told FedEx that best reliability they can
> commit to is 98%. Where our requirements are 5 9's, it is either Sun, HP or
> IBM mainframes...
>
> Oh, and for the record, our Sun and HP average uptime is 3.4 years so
> far.... The worse box we have ever had from HP, was up 1.5 years, before we
> had to replace the system board... NT/Win2000 will never approach that level
> of uptime.
>
> Jim
> "Howard J. Rogers" <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:bBvp9.50692$g9.147169_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> >
> > "Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message
> > news:3da68457$0$1292$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net...
> > > "Jim Stern" <jdstern_at_k2services.com> wrote in message
> > > news:ao52s5$fdl$1_at_news.utelfla.com...
> > > > Damn right... NT is definitely a no no for real critical applications,
> > too
> > > > many variables for the O/S to be stable.
> > >
> > > Are you sure this isn't just a knee jerk response. We have 2000 servers
> > > running line of business apps that have been up for (checks uptime) 118
> > > days. The downtime was for power work. Setup correctly windows 2000 *is*
> a
> > > stable OS. Now I'm not suggesting that we move apps supporting 10,000
> > users
> > > across to win2k from Solaris or HPUX or whatever, but windows is now a
> > > perfectly satisfactory server operating system. Moreover in this
> > particular
> > > case the application appears to be a single table app storing logs or
> > stats
> > > or some such.
> > >
> >
> > Yup. Frankly, I'm getting bored with the "Micro$oft" and "Windoze" crap.
> >
> > My home server (2000) has been up for 221 days. It would have been more,
> > but the previous 119 days were interrupted by a thunderstorm knocking out
> > the power. One UPS later, and all is well. Even my XP desktop, which
> gets
> > punishment aplenty and all manner of freeware installs, deinstalls and
> > anything in between, has been up for 54 days.
> >
> > This myth that Windows is unstable is just that: myth. These days. But
> > even so, I remember my NT4 servers at a large Insurance company running
> for
> > three months at a time without interruption, except when I wanted to
> bounce
> > them for service pack or backup issues.
> >
> > I blame the installers. Not the software.
> >
> > Regards
> > HJR
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Niall Litchfield
> > > Oracle DBA
> > > Audit Commission UK
> > > *****************************************
> > > Please include version and platform
> > > and SQL where applicable
> > > It makes life easier and increases the
> > > likelihood of a good answer
> > >
> > > ******************************************
> > >
> > >
> >
> >

My experiences at Boeing and AT&T mirror what you report. Much of this is a question of how much risk you can tolerate. Or, perhaps, the boiling point of upper management.

Daniel Morgan Received on Mon Oct 14 2002 - 10:52:01 CDT