Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: webdev: August 2002:
[webdev] Re: postnuke work

[webdev] Re: postnuke work

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: webdev@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [webdev] Re: postnuke work
From: Tom Hull <thull2@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2002 01:11:05 -0500
Reply-to: webdev@xxxxxxxxx

Jeff Vian wrote:
> Dale W Hodge wrote:
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: webdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Tom Hull
>>>Of course, if anyone wants to propose a better machine and/or
>>>a better connection, we should consider that.
> I have a K6-2 300 CPU I will donate if the existing motherbord will 
> support it, or if someone can come up with a suitable motherboard.
> Also have some memory available.

The current machine is a Pentium 133, 128MB RAM (I think that's 4*32,
and may be the max), SCSI, 4.3GB disk. The loadavg is currently next
to nothing, but it's running 91MB into swap, and has accumulated 9:35
in kswapd (over 128 days). /var is small and at 49%, nothing else is
remotely close to running out of disk. mysqld and nsd have >7000
pages of memory; postmaster has much less.

>>No suggestions here.
>>>Elsewhere, Dale
>>>suggested using debian instead of the current krud/red hat
>>>system. Biggest problem I see with that is that it would wipe
>>>out a lot of reusable configuration on the current machine;
>>>OTOH, it may be a good idea for a new machine. (Although as
>>>a debian non-user I don't know that.)
>>I only suggest this if we change machines.  Debian seems to manage security 
>>better than RedHat.  Package management is a dream by comparison.  Now that
>>Debian 3.0 has released, it's a fairly up-to-date system.
> On which system are you saying package management is a dream?
> I don't have any problems with security on RedHat.  And it has been very 
> easy to keep packages up to date and add new ones.
> OTOH, as a non-debian user, I hear debian is usually slower to release 
> updates because they try to keep it extremely stable and don't release 
> things until after they have been in use and tested by others for 
> security and stability. If I was making the decision it would be RedHat, 
>   but that is based on comfort and familiarity with the system.
> AFAIK, unless we have been stressing the existing machine, why does it 
> need to be upgraded right now?  What is the hardware exactly? I thought 
> it was a pentium 133, and that is old but still seems pretty solid for a 
> site that is not highly stressed for activity.

See above for the hardware. I think that apache+php will stress it a bit
more, but there isn't any obvious problem at this point, and nsd+postgres
will go away sooner or later.

  *  Tom Hull * thull2 at *

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]