Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Hello What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day Troll, troll, troll your boat, gently down the stream... ;) That's no bad question, because ezmlm with idx version more than 0.40 on Solaris generates bug - the post is not delivered and core is dumped. This bug is first reported by me in September 2000, where I have first one installed qmail+ezmlm+idx on Solaris 2.6 and later on 2.7 and later has been described by others. The solution is to use idx ver. 0.40 or installin patch to ezmlm+idx, which are described on this list too. Maybe this information should be added to idx faqa, because still a lot peoples reports this sytuation. So, this is improtant information for the peoples choosing Solaris for qmail+ezmlm if idx wanna use. Piotr --- Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Thus spake Henning Brauer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Kindly ignoring that this is dicussed a thousand times in the past and you can find this in the archives the answer is BSD. qmail relies on some BSD FFS semantics not 100% followed by linux' ext2fs for example. Troll, troll, troll your boat, gently down the stream... ;) The correct answer would have been: If you need to ask which operating system is best, you are too incompetent to run a server on the Internet. Felix
Re: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Thank god we have you around Fenix to drag up a troll's thread that hasn't been discussed in two days and is completely OT. Whatever would this list do without you to jab at the ignorant to make yourself feel so much bigger. Now get the f*ck back on topic. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thus spake Henning Brauer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Kindly ignoring that this is dicussed a thousand times in the past and you can find this in the archives the answer is BSD. qmail relies on some BSD FFS semantics not 100% followed by linux' ext2fs for example. Troll, troll, troll your boat, gently down the stream... ;) The correct answer would have been: If you need to ask which operating system is best, you are too incompetent to run a server on the Internet. Felix
RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
You were right, and I was wrong. The 2G limit is now removed as of kernel 2.4.x. Dave. -Original Message- From: Karsten W. Rohrbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 10:05 AM To: David T. Ashley Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD David T. Ashley([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.27 20:42:50 +: If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. what 2g limit? /k -- Love does not make the world go around, just up and down a bit. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.net/ karstenrohrbach.de -- alphangenn.net -- alphascene.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46 Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 10x
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
David T. Ashley([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.07.02 12:46:24 +: You were right, and I was wrong. The 2G limit is now removed as of kernel 2.4.x. *BSD != Linux /k Dave. -Original Message- From: Karsten W. Rohrbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 10:05 AM To: David T. Ashley Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD David T. Ashley([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.27 20:42:50 +: If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. what 2g limit? /k -- Love does not make the world go around, just up and down a bit. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.net/ karstenrohrbach.de -- alphangenn.net -- alphascene.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46 Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 10x -- God must love assholes --She made so many of them. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.net/ karstenrohrbach.de -- alphangenn.net -- alphascene.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46 Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 10x PGP signature
RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
*BSD ! = Does NOT equal linux -Original Message- From: Karsten W. Rohrbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 12:40 PM To: David T. Ashley Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD David T. Ashley([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.07.02 12:46:24 +: You were right, and I was wrong. The 2G limit is now removed as of kernel 2.4.x. *BSD != Linux /k Dave. -Original Message- From: Karsten W. Rohrbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 10:05 AM To: David T. Ashley Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD David T. Ashley([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.27 20:42:50 +: If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. what 2g limit? /k -- Love does not make the world go around, just up and down a bit. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.net/ karstenrohrbach.de -- alphangenn.net -- alphascene.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46 Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 10x -- God must love assholes --She made so many of them. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.net/ karstenrohrbach.de -- alphangenn.net -- alphascene.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46 Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 10x
Re: OT: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
--On Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:18:02 PM + Uwe Ohse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just feels like a system, rather than a hodge-podge of parts. Solaris also has this feel to it. How do you manage to ignore the /usr/ucb (and xpg4 and ...) compatibility braindamage? I just ignore it. :-) I admit that I was doing a wee bit of trolling in that there has been a lot of Slowlaris sentiment on this list. I do prefer Solaris on SPARC. That's my personal preference and that's that. It has worked well for me. I'm also a *BSD fan. I would choose FreeBSD first for x86 hardware. I also like NeXT/OPENSTEP and used that successfully for a long time. And I just bought a Mac so I can run OS X. It's Linux that leaves me a bit cold. It's good, and Debian is quite impressive in many ways. I even installed SGI's XFS port with RH 7.1 and it's quite competent. But Linux still feels chaotic and the documentation sucks. Just my opinion. And I did preface the subject of my reply with an OT so that it could be ignored more readily.
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
David T. Ashley([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.27 20:42:50 +: If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. what 2g limit? /k -- Love does not make the world go around, just up and down a bit. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.net/ karstenrohrbach.de -- alphangenn.net -- alphascene.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46 Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 10x PGP signature
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 09:22:02PM -0300, Federico Edelman Anaya wrote: What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Kindly ignoring that this is dicussed a thousand times in the past and you can find this in the archives the answer is BSD. qmail relies on some BSD FFS semantics not 100% followed by linux' ext2fs for example. -- * Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de * * Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany * Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 01:07:56AM -0400, Niles Rowland wrote: Actually, Linux and FreeBSD are the systems of choice in startup porn companies because of their low cost. Once a company begins to move major traffic they find that low cost systems have too many limitations to handle what the leaders of the company want to do. This is when they use their new found wealth to buy Solaris. How much did sun pay to make you say this? Slowlaris is crap. go with bsd. -- * Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de * * Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany * Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 11:44:12AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: Actually, Linux and FreeBSD are the systems of choice in startup porn companies because of their low cost. Once a company begins to move How much did sun pay to make you say this? Slowlaris is crap. go with bsd. He just can't make difference between ftp.cdrom.com and pornosite... Alex.
OT: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
--On Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:40 AM -0400 List Monkey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is when they use their new found wealth to buy Solaris. Oh, give me a BREAK. What, do you work for Sun? I would choose Solaris first for a high-volume web server. Suns have been more reliable in my experience than any PC-based OS. I've heard that qmail isn't happy on Solaris, but I figure that's a qmail problem. :-) FreeBSD is also a very respectable OS. I wouldn't have any problem with it, but I just think of Solaris first. Linux I have mixed emotions about. It's good, but it just doesn't feel solid to me. It feels like a bunch of stuff that somebody jammed together. Perhaps the excellent Solaris and FreeBSD documentation has me spoiled. FreeBSD has a really coherent feel to it. It's hard to describe, but it just feels like a system, rather than a hodge-podge of parts. Solaris also has this feel to it. I prefer Debian for Linux, and it really is quite good. But somehow it just isn't what I'd choose first for a production box.
Re: OT: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:03:44AM -0400, Stuart Krivis wrote: I would choose Solaris first for a high-volume web server. Suns have been more reliable in my experience than any PC-based OS. come on, stop trolling. on slowlaris fork() is unbelievable slow. slowlaris is a very bad choice for any internet server. fork() is one of the most important functions here. not only for qmail but for nearly any server, including apache. For the reliability you really wan't to get reasonable hardware. running any BSD on it and you have a very reliable system. I'd prefer OpenBSD over FreeBSD, but that's personal choice. I've heard that qmail isn't happy on Solaris, but I figure that's a qmail problem. :-) no, it's a slowlaris problem. -- * Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de * * Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany * Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Linux using ReiserFS has no more limit of 2Gb file size. - Original Message - From: David T. Ashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 9:42 PM Subject: RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD Just be careful about Linux because it has a maximum 2G file size (size for a single file). This can get in the way of some search engines which build large random-access files that exceed 2G. But it should not pose any kind of a problem for mail, especially if MAILDIR format is used. I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and lots of hits. If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. Dave. -Original Message- From: root [mailto:root]On Behalf Of Federico Edelman Anaya Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Thanks very much!
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Niles, Wrong sorry. Actually the reason why most companies choose to have Solaris, Is that Wall Street (If your in the US and a technology company wanting to go public) will look at the OS that your company uses and it does have some effect on what your IPO is going to be. Sean From: Niles Rowland Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:07 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and lots of hits. Actually, Linux and FreeBSD are the systems of choice in startup porn companies because of their low cost. Once a company begins to move major traffic they find that low cost systems have too many limitations to handle what the leaders of the company want to do. This is when they use their new found wealth to buy Solaris.
Re: OT: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:03:44AM -0400, Stuart Krivis wrote: I would choose Solaris first for a high-volume web server. Suns have been more reliable in my experience than any PC-based OS. Sun hardware, yes. Solaris, now. Solaris is slow, buggy and eats more resources than i could believe. I've heard that qmail isn't happy on Solaris, but I figure that's a qmail problem. :-) can you imagine the pain a solaris admin has when he thinks of inetd? every fork/exec cycles burns 8 or 9 times as much cpu power than under reasonable operating systems. FreeBSD is also a very respectable OS. I wouldn't have any problem with it, but I just think of Solaris first. A misjudgement. just feels like a system, rather than a hodge-podge of parts. Solaris also has this feel to it. How do you manage to ignore the /usr/ucb (and xpg4 and ...) compatibility braindamage? Regards, Uwe
RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Linux running Kernel 2.4.x has done away with the 2GB limit. No need for ReiserFS or XFS to solve this problem. As an FYI. One of the largest search engines on the net runs a Red Hat Linux farm. Google. So it can't be all bad. # -Original Message- # From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] # Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 5:00 AM # To: David T. Ashley; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Subject: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD # # # Linux using ReiserFS has no more limit of 2Gb file size. # # # - Original Message - # From: David T. Ashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] # To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 9:42 PM # Subject: RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD # # # Just be careful about Linux because it has a maximum 2G file size # (size for # a single file). This can get in the way of some search engines # which build # large random-access files that exceed 2G. But it should not pose any kind # of a problem for mail, especially if MAILDIR format is used. # # I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the # Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, # because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and # lots of hits. # # If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. # # Dave. # # -Original Message- # From: root [mailto:root]On Behalf Of Federico Edelman Anaya # Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:22 PM # To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Subject: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD # # # What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and # disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and # I don't know what hard can I buy? :) # # # Thanks very much! # # # #
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Hi! Sean Chittenden wrote: What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Solaris is slow to fork and qmail makes liberal use of that But ... Sun is not a valid option?? call, so solaris is out of the question. After that, it's close between FreeBSD and Linux. I'm pretty biased towards from FreeBSD because of its development environment and the thoughtfulness of their engineering team (Linux is pretty hackish). FreeBSD with softupdates turned on will give you the best performance and reliability though amongst the three options. Best of luck, but be careful, this smells like a troll. -sc -- Sean Chittenden Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Thanks for that info. I was skeptical, and I have a 2.4.x kernel on my Linux box, so I tried it. You are right. The 2**31 - 1 byte limit is gone. I am 38. I am old. Early Alzheimer's. -Original Message- From: Frank Tanner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 8:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD Linux running Kernel 2.4.x has done away with the 2GB limit. No need for ReiserFS or XFS to solve this problem. As an FYI. One of the largest search engines on the net runs a Red Hat Linux farm. Google. So it can't be all bad. # -Original Message- # From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] # Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 5:00 AM # To: David T. Ashley; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Subject: Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD # # # Linux using ReiserFS has no more limit of 2Gb file size. # # # - Original Message - # From: David T. Ashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] # To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 9:42 PM # Subject: RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD # # # Just be careful about Linux because it has a maximum 2G file size # (size for # a single file). This can get in the way of some search engines # which build # large random-access files that exceed 2G. But it should not pose any kind # of a problem for mail, especially if MAILDIR format is used. # # I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the # Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, # because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and # lots of hits. # # If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. # # Dave. # # -Original Message- # From: root [mailto:root]On Behalf Of Federico Edelman Anaya # Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:22 PM # To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Subject: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD # # # What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and # disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and # I don't know what hard can I buy? :) # # # Thanks very much! # # # #
Please, please, stop... RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Please, let's go back to a qmail discussion.
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 09:22:02PM -0300, Federico Edelman Anaya wrote: What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) go away, troll. --Adam
RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Just be careful about Linux because it has a maximum 2G file size (size for a single file). This can get in the way of some search engines which build large random-access files that exceed 2G. But it should not pose any kind of a problem for mail, especially if MAILDIR format is used. I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and lots of hits. If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. Dave. -Original Message- From: root [mailto:root]On Behalf Of Federico Edelman Anaya Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Thanks very much!
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Solaris is slow to fork and qmail makes liberal use of that call, so solaris is out of the question. After that, it's close between FreeBSD and Linux. I'm pretty biased towards from FreeBSD because of its development environment and the thoughtfulness of their engineering team (Linux is pretty hackish). FreeBSD with softupdates turned on will give you the best performance and reliability though amongst the three options. Best of luck, but be careful, this smells like a troll. -sc -- Sean Chittenden PGP signature
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and lots of hits. Actually, Linux and FreeBSD are the systems of choice in startup porn companies because of their low cost. Once a company begins to move major traffic they find that low cost systems have too many limitations to handle what the leaders of the company want to do. This is when they use their new found wealth to buy Solaris.
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and lots of hits. Actually, Linux and FreeBSD are the systems of choice in startup porn companies because of their low cost. Once a company begins to move major traffic they find that low cost systems have too many limitations to handle what the leaders of the company want to do. This is when they use their new found wealth to buy Solaris. This is now officially a troll. So next time you see an installation for a porn site pushing over 300Mbps that's running Solaris, show me/tell me: I'll be amazed. Linux is what most startup porn joints use because they're new to the business and Linux has hype and media attention. Once the traffic gets up there, the traffic starts to exceed 60-120Mbps, then you'll see a switch from Linux to FreeBSD. In there somewhere you'll see them experiment with Solaris and watch it crumble and fail miserably in the Mbps / $ calculation. Solaris is good for running on redundant hardware where you can hot-swap anything out at any time to maintain real 24/7. Go back to your hobbit hole or email me and I'll setup a different list to talk about the merits of various operating systems that I've used in my day and the various installations/companies I've done work for. This thread is now officially dead unless resurrected on a different mailing list. -sc -- Sean Chittenden PGP signature
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and lots of hits. Actually, Linux and FreeBSD are the systems of choice in startup porn companies because of their low cost. Once a company begins to move major traffic they find that low cost systems have too many limitations to handle what the leaders of the company want to do. This is when they use their new found wealth to buy Solaris. Oh, give me a BREAK. What, do you work for Sun? If you want to troll, may I suggest Lake Ontario, with 4 shiners, for good salmon fishing.
RE: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
Umm..wasn't the 2G file limit fixed in the 2.0 kernels? --- David T. Ashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just be careful about Linux because it has a maximum 2G file size (size for a single file). This can get in the way of some search engines which build large random-access files that exceed 2G. But it should not pose any kind of a problem for mail, especially if MAILDIR format is used. I understand that Free BSD and Linux are the overwhelming choices of the Internet pornography industry. That is a good technical figure of merit, because it means these servers are stable (for HTTP) when getting lots and lots of hits. If Free BSD breaks the 2G limit, I'd go with Free BSD. Dave. -Original Message- From: root [mailto:root]On Behalf Of Federico Edelman Anaya Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day and I don't know what hard can I buy? :) Thanks very much! __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
