Donald Becker writes: > On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Christopher E. Brown wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > Richard> It might not be a 2.0.36 driver that is needed. It may be the > > > > Richard> 2.0.36 reliability! > > > > > > > > 2.0.36 reliawhat?? If you are looking for GigE performance you are > > > > likely to want SMP and SMP in 2.0.36 is absolutely not realiable. > > > > > > Actually by 2.0.36 its very reliable. It still gives sucky performance. > > > > forbin:~# uname -a;uptime > > Linux forbin 2.0.36 #2 SMP Sun Apr 4 14:04:56 AKDT 1999 i686 unknown > > 7:40pm up 435 days, 2:43, 1 user, load average: 5.46, 5.30, 5.28 > > Dual PPro 200Mhz, 128M ECC FPM @66mhz > > Ultra-Wide + Cheetas > > Box has been rebooted once since the last kernel build, when > > we lost power for 4 hrs. We had 3.5 hrs backup power. > > That beats our cluster record. The longest uptime we had with 2.0.* was > between the power conditioner shorting out when a fan was being replaced, > and a whole-room shutdown that was traced to a air conditioner on fire -- > only nine months. The 2.0.3* series was very, very reliable. % uname -a;uptime Linux dmz1 2.3.18 #3 Tue Nov 9 19:21:51 MST 1999 i686 unknown 10:37pm up 206 days, 3:20, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 The 2.3.x series isn't that shabby. Regards, Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
