VisorCentral.com - 5 9's of uptime

VisorCentral.com >> Discussion >> Other Areas of Interest >> Off Topic
5 9's of uptime


	Post a New Thread \| Post A Reply

Last Thread Next Thread

Author

Topic: 5 9's of uptime

BEN
Member

Registered: Feb 2000
Location:
Posts: 638

5 9's of uptime

In reading all of the Technical articles on Windows 2000 advance server I kept on coming upon the lines of 99.999% uptime. Very impressive, only 5 minutes a day of "unplanned downtime". Sounds fair enough to me, so today I upgrade my NT 4.0 server (it needed a reinstall anyways) to 2k advance server. Guess what, after only 13 hours of uptime of teh server and trying to configure the client machiens (what a bit*h, but I won't get into that) I'm sitting around and watching TV when I look at the screen. BLUE! I couldn't belive it. It had begun a memory dump after a crash, now at the time of teh crash, it wasn't doing anything. It took over 6 minutes to do the memory dump and another 1 and a half to boot again. So much for the 5 minutes of downtime as I already have had 6. Now if I multiply this out, it give me 36500 minutes of downtime a year. Pretty far off from the 5 minutes that Microsuck expects. Ahh, I just wish that I could get this thing to work properly and hopefully it doesn't crash again before I need to make the final decision about it tomorrow around 8PM so I have plenty of time to get it going for work on monday.

BEN

03-03-2002 08:08 AM

dick-richardson
Member

Registered: Oct 2000
Location: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 2531

I was expecting the same thing with Linux when I started (lots o' claims, little o' delivery), but have been pleasantly surprised.

I may well refuse to pay for software again. Come to think of it, nevermind. I want another Mac.

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

03-04-2002 12:39 AM

ToolkiT
VisorCentral Staff

Registered: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 1883

Win2K has been very good to me..... lots better than NT...
but 99.999% is to high for any OS.... unless you turn it on and don't use it... even then I think it would choke in the end...

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

03-04-2002 07:11 AM

recordond
Member

Registered: Jan 2001
Location:
Posts: 278

We have been running a RedHat Linux webserver and it hasn't been restarted in at least 2 years. It works flawlessly.

03-04-2002 08:07 AM

hmp32
Member

Registered: Feb 2002
Location: I think I want to live in Germanium when I grow up
Posts: 29

Re: 5 9's of uptime

quote:
Originally posted by BEN
In reading all of the Technical articles on Windows 2000 advance server I kept on coming upon the lines of 99.999% uptime. Very impressive, only 5 minutes a day of "unplanned downtime". Sounds fair enough to me, so today I upgrade my NT 4.0 server (it needed a reinstall anyways) to 2k advance server. Guess what, after only 13 hours of uptime of teh server and trying to configure the client machiens (what a bit*h, but I won't get into that) I'm sitting around and watching TV when I look at the screen. BLUE! I couldn't belive it. It had begun a memory dump after a crash, now at the time of teh crash, it wasn't doing anything. It took over 6 minutes to do the memory dump and another 1 and a half to boot again. So much for the 5 minutes of downtime as I already have had 6. Now if I multiply this out, it give me 36500 minutes of downtime a year. Pretty far off from the 5 minutes that Microsuck expects. Ahh, I just wish that I could get this thing to work properly and hopefully it doesn't crash again before I need to make the final decision about it tomorrow around 8PM so I have plenty of time to get it going for work on monday.

BEN

Windows, in any form, is not and I repeat is, is not an Enterprise ready server platform. Anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong.
UNIX based OSes have been enterprise read for some 20 years, scale better, and generally have lower maintaince costs. Where as WIndows may be cheaper to deploy, but more expensive to upgrade and maintain.

Note, I am not even talking about the desktop market. And here again, depends on what you are doing.

Windows claims to be a business solution, which is often mistaken for solutions to other problems. Windows it no more the ultimate computer OS of everything than UNIX/Linux is.

Now Porsche.... there is the perfect ever evolving machine!

-henry

03-04-2002 08:37 AM

thorin
Member

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 415

quote:
Originally posted by recordond
We have been running a RedHat Linux webserver and it hasn't been restarted in at least 2 years. It works flawlessly.

wow. two years . my linux router has gone on ofr over 3 months, but since i inevitable want to tweak something every so often, im always restarting it. it's never crashed though. ever.

__________________
-thorin

I have a webcomic. You should read it, or I may do something rash. <b><a href=http://driveby.keenspace.com/>Drive-by Loitering</a></b> is updated every monday, wednesday and friday.

<!img src=http://www.frontfly.com/myrouter/vcsig2.gif alt="Soundsgood is too elite for the punks."><img src=http://www.frontfly.com/vcsig.gif ><!img src=http://www.frontfly.com/myrouter/vcsig2.gif alt="Soundsgood is too elite for the punks.">

03-04-2002 10:16 AM

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:02 PM.

Last Thread Next Thread

[

Show a Printable Version |

Email This Page to Someone! |

Receive updates to this thread ]

Forum Jump: