Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!daily-planet.execpc.com!homer.alpha.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!osi-east2.es.net!cebaf4.cebaf.gov!recycle.cebaf.gov!doolitt
From: doolitt@recycle.cebaf.gov (Larry Doolittle)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: The better (more suitable)Unix?? FreeBSD or Linux
Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.development.system
Date: 10 Feb 1996 17:13:48 GMT
Organization: CEBAF
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4fijoc$otk@cebaf4.cebaf.gov>
References: <4er9hp$5ng@orb.direct.ca> <DMD8rr.oIB@isil.lloke.dna.fi> <4f9skh$2og@dyson.iquest.net> <4fd8sc$cep@daffy.anetsrvcs.uwrf.edu> <4fg8dk$fs@dyson.iquest.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: recycle.cebaf.gov
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:13564 comp.os.linux.development.system:17063
John S. Dyson (root@dyson.iquest.net) wrote:
: It is likely with the stability of both Linux and FreeBSD, and the advent
: of low-cost good quality UPSes, the issue of sync vs. async filesystems is
: becoming less of a bother, except in mission critical applications.
I agree. It's no trick to keep a Linux system (on a UPS) up for
many months, and then the only reboot on purpose because you want
to fiddle with the hardware. I have a Pentium that has crashed
exactly once in the past year (excessive stupidity running strange
code as root). I don't suppose FreeBSD would be any different in
that regard.
I, personally, want stability first, performance second. Recovery
from failure just doesn't matter if the stability is there.
- Larry Doolittle ldoolitt@cebaf.gov