Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:25:30 -0800 | From | J Sloan <> | Subject | [OT] Re: Nasty suprise with uptime |
| |
Jan Dvorak wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:39:37PM -0800, J Sloan wrote: > > So, is there an implicit Linux policy to upgrade > > the distro, or at least the kernel, every 496 days > > whether it needs it or not? > > Rather, you should think about your poor hw. It's nice to sit down at least once > a year, to clean up your box of that spider/ant feudalistic colonies, bug > airports, to check connectors, upgrade some components, and other such things > which you can't risk doing online at 32bit platform. You know, there are > some x86s which wasn't projected to even LAST as long as one year :-)
Certainly a point -
It's not too unreasonable to bring down a server for maintenance every 16 months.
However this is good, expensive hardware...
Consider HP-UX 10.20, a 32-bit, 1996 vintage commercial unix, in many ways somewhat primitive compared to Linux:
root@zinc:/root# uname -a HP-UX zinc B.10.20 U 9000/800 2003576880 unlimited-user license root@zinc:/root# uptime 3:24pm up 681 days, 6:43, 12 users, load average: 1.17, 1.15, 1.15
So clearly, it's not rocket science....
cu
jjs
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |