[OT] Re: Nasty suprise with uptime

[J Sloan <jjs@lexus.com>]

Jan Dvorak wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:39:37PM -0800, J Sloan wrote:
> > So, is there an implicit Linux policy to upgrade
> > the distro, or at least the kernel, every 496 days
> > whether it needs it or not?
>
> Rather, you should think about your poor hw. It's nice to sit down at least once
> a year, to clean up your box of that spider/ant feudalistic colonies, bug
> airports, to check connectors, upgrade some components, and other such things
> which you can't risk doing online at 32bit platform. You know, there are
> some x86s which wasn't projected to even LAST as long as one year :-)

Certainly a point -

It's not too unreasonable to bring down a
server for maintenance every 16 months.

However this is good, expensive  hardware...

Consider HP-UX 10.20, a 32-bit, 1996 vintage
commercial unix, in many ways somewhat
primitive compared to Linux:

root@zinc:/root# uname -a
HP-UX zinc B.10.20 U 9000/800 2003576880 unlimited-user license
root@zinc:/root# uptime
  3:24pm  up 681 days,  6:43,  12 users,  load average: 1.17, 1.15, 1.15

So clearly, it's not rocket science....

cu

jjs