On Sun, 28 May 2006 13:58:39 -0500 "Tony Abernethy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adam wrote: > > The question was about scalability. > > I keep seeing that term. Is it supposed to mean something? Yes, and retarded posts like this aren't needed thanks. > An application which has evolved under Linux will have taken advantage > of various quirks in Linux and managed to avoid quirks which would make > it slower under Linux. If you put your left shoe on your right foot, > you will discover that the shoe is not big enough for your foot. And applications which have evolved on many unixes, and are still developed on many unixes are being used. > I would expect to be able to shove more stuff through something > that required constant babysitting that something setup and forgot. > Up to a point, that is. Oddly enough, I would expect OpenBSD to > handle stuff where Linux is incapable of scaling;) I think if you don't even understand a simple question, and have no way to answer, you shouldn't bother responding with nonsense. Its a very simple question. I know openbsd scales poorly in SMP, I know it scales poorly using apache, sendmail, courier, squid, mrtg nagois, etc. I just want to know what it is that it does scale well at. Pretending openbsd scales well at these things, or pretending its other benefits make up for this doesn't change anything. Nobody is saying scalability is all that matters, I just want to know what the mysterious task that openbsd scales well at is. Adam
