Hmmm. Didn't we recently read about an IBM multi-processor machine running
The Big Blue Penguin (or whatever they call their flavor of Linux) which blew
the freakin' doors off anything MS has ever made?
Steve
Michael Merritt wrote:
> Karsten Johansson wrote:
> >
> > Ewan Dunbar wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 12 Apr 1999, Fred A. Miller wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > This is DEAD wrong in a lot of areas...but, you should read it.
> > > Where? I haven't found any problems with it. WAY better than that WSJ
> > > article.
> >
> > Yes, I fail to see where it is dead wrong... especially in a "lot" of
> > areas. Please explain.
>
> Well, take the paragraph:
> "Missing from Linux are high-availability features that would let one
> Linux server step in and take over if another failed; full-fledged
> support for computers with multiple
> processors; and a "journaling" file system that is necessary to quickly
> reboot a crashed machine without having to laboriously reconstruct the
> computer's system files, the study said."
>
> Is Beowulf merely a figment of my imagination? As well as many other
> clustering solutions. Try doing half of that with NT.
>
> Also, my server does quite well using its dual processors -- I'm not
> sure how much more support is needed to be "full-fledged?"
>
> --
> Michael Merritt
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.merrittpop.com/
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.merrittpop.com/jmm/
> ICQ: 21021306
> --
> To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
> Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
> archive at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
--
To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
archive at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
