*BSD News Article 57542


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news1!not-for-mail
From: root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson)
Subject: Re: BSDI vs Win NT and netscape commerce server
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net
Message-ID: <4bben7$4tp@dyson.iquest.net>
Sender: news@iquest.net (News Admin)
Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine
References: <4aku63$4bd@news.nstn.ca> <4asdm6$bkm@arrow.va.pubnix.com> <4avvgb$br@dyson.iquest.net> <4b8crk$fnh@news.voicenet.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 10:59:51 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <4b8crk$fnh@news.voicenet.com>, Lamer <Lamer> wrote:
>root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote:
>
>> I have heard that with a new (reasonable cost) upgrade, ftp.freebsd.org
>>will be serving between 500-1000 FTP users soon. 
>
>true enough, but the reasonable cost upgrade includes at least a P6
>box. they are testing it now.
>
True again -- but it had previously run with 400-500 users on a Neptune P5
with 192MB of memory..  The da*n triton chipset only supports 128MB of
which 64MB was cached -- and the triton "upgrade" was necessary for increasing
the number of PCI bus-masters :-(.  Wcarchive is mostly memory limited,
and most likely would have been setting at 500 users all along otherwise.
The CPU is a bonus more than anything (The MB supports more bus-masters and
memory.) If they (WC) upgraded their internet link, 1000+ users should be
possible.  Note that it appears to take about 200-300K per ftp user on
FreeBSD (and additionally, *evil* *nasty* perl-mirror scripts run taking
80MB of memory also, since wcarchive is a big mirror site.)  I think that
NT will have a ways to go before it reaches the performance and utility
level of *BSD*. (Free/Net/Open and BSDI.)

BTW, I use NT (3.5,3.51) -- I know NT and I know what it can do...  And I am
impressed in that it is the first real OS that I have seen from Microsoft.  They
have done a good job, but the *BSD* stuff is still better in the performance
arena (in general.)  I have some personal problems with NT -- I don't like
it, but that is not germane to this discussion...

John
dyson@freebsd.org