Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!inquo!news.caldera.com!enews.sgi.com!nntprelay.mathworks.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.he.net!cnn.nas.nasa.gov!not-for-mail
From: Paul Newhouse <newhouse~spam@rockhead.com>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Network Performance
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 1997 04:05:50 -0700
Organization: Rockhead Enterprises
Lines: 110
Message-ID: <33BB878E.15FB7483@rockhead.com>
References: <slrn5qngmn.ie2.jlc@mass-pc.wpi.edu> <5oh9h1$fuc$1@news9.gte.net> <33AC4AC3.2C67@Houston-InterWeb.COM> <5opk40$aho@nusakan.cedar.buffalo.edu> <33bac1aa.215140895@news.probe.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wanker.nas.nasa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.1.6-RELEASE i386)
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:43871
opsys@open-systems.net wrote:
>
> On 24 Jun 1997 19:09:52 -0400, Ajay Shekhawat
> <ajay-bsd@cedar.Buffalo.EDU> wrote:
>
> I don't think NT will ever DOMINATE the scene.
If Billy boy sticks with it long enough it might.
> I was recently talking to another consultant, who had mentioned that
> koch, ind. recently replaced ALL their unix cans for NT.
> there network was running a couple hundred unix cans.
> In less than 2 weeks they had removed NT and put unix back on.
This plan is brain dead.
> They could not get the flexibility or performance they could get out
> of unix.
I believe that. It's also irrelevant. The plan is brain dead.
> As you can imaging this was a VERY expensive lesson for them to learn.
It was expensive because the plan was brain dead ... I heard that some
where before??
> I'm sure they will not be so quick to hop on the MS bandwagon again
> after this "experiment". NT is here, and we need to learn to work with
> it. We just don't have a choice anymore. Someone in ;login recently
> brought up a good point. He asked how we were going to defend unix
> against NT. When your suit wearing boss says "Let's try running our
> print services off of NT instead of that cumbersome unix stuff".
> How can you explain to him that running a print server off a cheap PC
> with NT is not really all that cost effective in the long run. When
> all he see's is the bottom line, and doesnt look at the future or long
> term, the downtime, the unreliability, etc..
> Just a thought.
PC's aren't necessarily "cheap" these days but, why not run on the least
expensive platform that will do the job? And what does FreeBSD run on?
Isn't it the same cheap PC as NT?
If you want the "suit in charge" to do the right thing then you have
to show him the right thing in a way that he can defend it to the
"suit in charge of the ""suit in charge""". The plan should have been:
Lets get an NT box in here and get it doing what we need it to do.
Then lets it put into the configuration and run it under real loads
and evaluate its performance.
This can have 3 outcomes:
1) NT kicks butt.
2) NT gets it's butt kicked.
3) No appreciable difference.
Ok, I think 1) is unlikely and 2) most probable. At this point we
can convert the NT box to a BSD box and minimize our losses.
If, by some miricle, NT wins then why not run it? It just proved
itself the best for the job. Make sure you test it for all the
jobs and not just one of the tasks.
3) means it's a pure cost issue ... how much is FreeBSD again?
(that's not your only cost of course *8^))
At this point you can surely see the need for a "goals" document that
specifies why you are evaluating NT and what your systems need to be
doing.
How many simultaneous connections,
How many packets per second,
How many bits per second,
Reliability, blah, blah, blah, maintainability, blah, blah, blah
Set forth some hard definable mesuarements before hand, other wise the
suits will massage the data to fit the decision they've all ready made.
I'm not talking numbers but, things to be measured. Then compare the
empirical data.
What's the most likely outcome? When the suits start talking "let's
try NT you can't go wrong with M$" your suit can pop out this little
bit of info and say "we tried that, it has some problems",
It's a pain in the neck, I know. All the techies that let the swapp out
everything plan happen should be shot. So should their suit but, that's
a given. For your own protection you need to constructively manipulate
your suits:
"Yes Mr. Suit you're absolutely right NT is the wave of the future.
You can't go wrong with M$. Why this could be the brilliance that
puts you in the presidency ... if your right, ahhhh ... what if
this application turns out to be the one thing NT can't do??
WOW ... that's a career ender type scenerio. There could be some
downside risk here? Maybe, what if, ... <above plan>".
After all, when it fails he's gonna blame you anyway!
> In my little world the servers would be FreeBSD and the clients os/2.
And in my little world it's NetBSD servers and SGI, Cray and SP2
clients but we spec'd NT and others.
If *BBD is the best choice then you can prove it! Otherwise it just
a religous conviction and management is not faithful.
Later,
Paul
--
ISDN is almost like actually being connected to the net.