Any serious production servers yet?

[Danial Thom]

--- Vlad GALU <vladgalu at xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 6/3/06, Danial Thom <danial_thom at xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- Matthew Dillon
> <dillon at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >     I couldn't have put it better myself.
> > >
> > >     Vis-a-vie network performance, my goal
> for
> > > DragonFly is to have 'good'
> > >     performance.  But I think it is a
> complete
> > > waste of time to try to
> > >     squeeze every last erg out of the
> network
> > > subsystem like FreeBSD has.
> > >     We aren't trying to compete with Cisco,
> and
> > > nobody in their right mind
> > >     would take a turnkey BSD or linux-based
> > > system over a Cisco (or other
> > >     piece of high-end networking gear) to
> route
> > > multi-gigabits/sec of
> > >     traffic.   I still think we can get
> close
> > > to FreeBSD's rated performance,
> > >     eventually, but I am not willing to
> create
> > > a mess of hacks and crazy
> > >     configuration options to turn DragonFly
> > > into the ultimate ether switch
> > >     when I can purchase one off the shelf
> for a
> > > few hundred bucks.
> > >
> > >     I think the last time I tried to use a
> > > general purpose UNIX OS as an
> > >     actual 'router' was in 1994.  We used
> two
> > > BSDi boxes (and later FreeBSD
> > >     boxes) to route the two T1's that BEST
> > > Internet had when we had just
> > >     started up.  It was a horror, frankly.
> > > Hardware bugs in the ethernet
> > >     cards and even in the T1 card required
> a
> > > lot of hacking to work around,
> > >     and trying to run BGP with gated was
> even
> > > worse.
> > >
> > >     Back then 'real' networking hardware
> was
> > > bulky and expensive.  Today,
> > >     though, there is no excuse.  It's cheap
> > > (and even cheaper on E-Bay),
> > >     and far more reliable then a general
> > > purpose PC.
> > >
> > >     If someone is trying to route
> > > multi-gigabits worth of traffic then
> > >     the infrastructure is clearly important
> > > enough to warrent purchasing
> > >     dedicated networking gear.  If someone
> > > isn't trying to go all out,
> > >     then a general purpose OS might be
> > > adequate, if still not as reliable.
> > >
> > >     So all I can say to Mr Thom in that
> regard
> > > is: Stop trying to fit a
> > >     square peg into a round hole and just
> buy
> > > the appropriate gear for your
> > >     network infrastructure needs.
> > >
> > >                                            
>   -Matt
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Your caveman-like views are as troubling as
> they
> > are entertaining. You seem to have no grasp
> of
> > the modern world and no understanding of
> 'BSDs
> > niche. Everything was buggy in '94, but with
> you
> > and clowns like Paul Borman trying to do
> > networking, what the hell would you expect no
> > matter what you had to work with?  :)))
> >
> > Many, many large network appliances (load
> > balancers, bandwidth managers, firewalls,
> > security filters) are based on linux or BSD.
> The
> > reason is that CISCOs and "mega-gigabit
> routers"
> > have no extra CPU power to do things like
> > filtering and shaping at a very high level.
> I've
> > made myself many millons of $$ selling a few
> > thousand network devices, which is more than
> > you'll ever make having a really cool desktop
> OS,
> > even if its better than anything else out
> there.
> > Designing a product for fun is one thing, but
> if
> > you want to get funding you have to produce
> > something that's useful for the corporate
> world,
> > not for a bunch of pimply-faced college kids.
> The
> > reality of the corporate world is that even
> if
> > DFLY is the best damned OS ever written, they
> > will use windows or linux, because you can't
> > staff a support center with DFLY experts. Its
> > simply never going to happen. You can however
> get
> > in as a server platform, because only a
> couple of
> > guys have to know what they're doing.
> >
> > Unix as a desktop box is not even an
> > afterthought. 'BSDs niche is as a network
> server.
> > Period.
> >
> > You might think its a waste of time to
> optimize
> > networking, but it seems to me you're wasting
> > your time entirely if your goal is to be a
> little
> > faster than LINUX as a desktop box. Who
> cares?
> > FreeBSD with 1 processor is faster than linux
> > with 2, but no-one used FreeBSD anyway.
> Nobody
> > wants to use 'BSD as a desktop machine,
> except
> > for a handful of people with a lot more time
> on
> > their hands than the rest of us. People want
> to
> > use 'BSD as network servers. People in the
> real
> > world that is. Maybe thats why your not with
> > FreeBSD anymore; your refusal to modernize
> your
> > ideas to what's going on in the real world,
> and
> > your complete lack of understanding where the
> > dollars are to fund your efforts?
> >
> >
> 
>    I should probably be moving on the same
> trend the other subscribers
> follow and give you a very diplomatic pat on
> the shoulder, but your
> bluntness simply calls for more.
>    Shouldn't you be out, making some millions ?
> You seem to be better
> at it than at implanting your ideas into other
> people's minds.
> Everything they do, and especially Matt, is
> pro-bono. For fun. While
> their idea of having fun consists of spending a
> considerable amount of
> hours each day writing code, yours seem to be
> polishing your typing
> skills. Do all of us and especially yourself a
> favor and reconsider
> your schedule.
> 
> > DT
> 

I don't see that you have any credibility at all,
so why doesn a nobody like you even feel the need
to talk at all?

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com