Walt Reed wrote: <snip>
Any memory problem I've seen has shown up within the first month. It helps that we burn them in for a month before putting them into production. I run some drive / memory excersizing utilities during this time that pound on the server pretty hard. Compiling the Linux kernel over and over again also seems to be a good test :-)
<snip>
Ditto. Have about 30 385's that have been pretty solid, but the G5's are faster. It matters when you are doing jobs that take months to run... :-)
Walt - If you don't mind/are allowed to, can you tell us what your servers do? The reason i ask is this;
It seems to me that many users make decisions based on what they read on these lists, in mags, in (*cringe*) gartner reports etc, but i think we often miss the fact that many of the 'data points' come from squeaky wheels or completely irrelevant demos and 'studys'.
I always try to weight the current opinions based on the authors experience, zen-ness etc, *not* volume and clever nouns. I also weight heavily people with large karma, like (on this list) John, Mark, Karanbir, Jim etc - you *know* they would have looked at any issues like outdated firmware before they comment, so if they give something a bad review you can be fairly sure it is deserved.
So to get to the point - if you are doing tasks that take months, either you are doing it wrong, or it is a *real* job that requires a *real* OS on *great* hardware to get it done - I suspect the latter, which means your data points/comments are much more relevant than most.
So ... spill the beans :) MrKiwi _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
