Posted on 06/07/2006 4:17:30 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
Windows 2003 Server is a more reliable server operating system than Linux, a research firm said Monday.
According to the Yankee Group's annual server reliability survey, only Unix-based operating systems such as HP-UX and Sun Solaris 10 beat Windows on uptime. Windows 2003 Server, in fact, led the popular Red Hat Enterprise Linux with nearly 20 percent more annual uptime.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The two 1300+ day systems I have are internal webservers that are a bit overpowered for their current load. A lot of their processes have been offloaded to newer systems. They are scheduled to be decomissioned in the next 6 months.
That's not the way I meant it. I meant people care about how many hours per year is this web site available. Both the OS and the service affect that. IOW, I meant the OS is only part of the picture, and Microsoft has some things beyond the base OS that make it look even worse.
bash-2.05# uptime
10:14am up 236 day(s), 17:02, 1 user, load average: 0.28, 0.17, 0.19
bash-2.05# last reboot
reboot system boot Thu Oct 13 17:12
reboot system boot Thu Oct 13 17:04
reboot system boot Tue Feb 15 21:15
reboot system boot Tue Feb 15 21:04
reboot system boot Sun Nov 14 19:50
reboot system boot Mon Oct 18 10:16
reboot system boot Sat Oct 16 03:55
wtmp begins Sat Oct 16 03:55
bash-2.05#
Unfortunately, the 'last' command is of not much use if you measure uptime in years...
$ uptime
10:16am up 1349 day(s), 17:16, 1 user, load average: 0.01, 0.01, 0.01
fada1w3p11: pugha :) last reboot
reboot system boot Thu Sep 26 17:00
reboot system boot Sun Aug 11 16:34
reboot system boot Sun Aug 4 15:33
reboot system boot Sun Aug 4 15:30
reboot system boot Sun Aug 4 15:27
reboot system boot Fri Aug 2 15:35
reboot system boot Fri Aug 2 15:27
reboot system boot Fri Jul 26 08:01
reboot system boot Thu Jul 25 17:05
wtmp begins Thu Jul 25 17:05
$
So, the system was rebooted sept 26. But it doesn't tell you that was Sept 6., 2003!
Apologies and good point
If youre using log rotate last is not going to be too much help..
Yup. Logrotate kills the usefulness of last. You should see the size of the wtmp files we have on some of our systems.
The system I put up gets a bit of traffic so I cant leave logs out there or I would fill up the drive..
The system is running Solaris 8 and is set up to only log at 'error' or above.
I've had multi-hundred meg wtmp files on some systems, so I really prefer to set logrotate to catch them before they get out of hand.
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2005/04/the_truth_about_1.html
What about the Novell Server that had over 6 years of Uptime??
My Linux firewall:
16:10:53 up 262 days, 8:39, 1 user, load average: 1.84, 1.38, 1.26
You both have me beat...8^)
4: uptime
16:56 up 318 days, 12:01, 40 users, load average: 0.53, 0.53, 0.53
If you search my posts you'll see that this is probably the first time I've brought that up.....
Well, I didn't explicitly say it, but I clearly implied it.
Most of the time, their claims can be thrown out on their face, no need to play the silly discreditism game.
10:47pm up 1:16, 3 users, load average: 0.07, 0.05, 0.07
:-)
Mine was when I was connected to the Unix server at school...
This is for my Suse 10.0 box...
9:48pm up 1:08, 3 users, load average: 0.72, 0.67, 0.48
Ah hah! AH HAH!!! SEE!! I BEAT YOU BY 8 MINUTES!
lol
:-P
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.