From: roland <for...@gm...> - 2004-10-25 23:49:12
|
Hi developers, today I tried colinux and I`m very impressed. I have 2 questions: - Unfortunately colinux doesn`t seem to run on NT4 . When will colinux work on NT4? Is it planned, that NT4 is supported at all? We still have lot`s of NT4 Desktops in our company and I would be happy, if colinux would run on NT4 - Is colinux stable enough to run on a "production" system? I plan to consolidate 2 gateway-machines (one linux, one windows) into one physical machine and it would be cool to migrate the mostly idling linux-machine (only mail and ssh gatewaying) onto the higher-loaded windows-machine. basically, colinux would fit here very well, but i don`t know if it`s stable enough. TIA roland |
From: Martin K. <ka...@po...> - 2004-10-26 08:40:10
|
Looking in archives... > - Unfortunately colinux doesn`t seem to run on NT4 . When will colinux work on > NT4? Is it planned, that NT4 is supported at all? We still have lot`s of NT4 > Desktops in our company and I would be happy, if colinux would run on NT4 There's no plan to support anything else then W2K, WXP and Linux yet. > - Is colinux stable enough to run on a "production" system? I plan to consolidate > 2 gateway-machines (one linux, one windows) into one physical machine and it would > be cool to migrate the mostly idling linux-machine (only mail and ssh gatewaying) > onto the higher-loaded windows-machine. basically, colinux would fit here very well, > but i don`t know if it`s stable enough. Some people stated, that running colinux longer (some days?) can cause some unpredicted events occuring. you can even read that there are still some time problems. as you can check, there's 0.6.1 version out there, so it's not thought for production. you can give that a try, but i wouldn't. Regards, Martin |
From: Sam L. <sa...@li...> - 2004-10-26 19:51:41
|
Martin Kanich wrote: > Looking in archives... > >> - Unfortunately colinux doesn`t seem to run on NT4 . When will colinux >> work on NT4? Is it planned, that NT4 is supported at all? We still >> have lot`s of NT4 Desktops in our company and I would be happy, if >> colinux would run on NT4 > > There's no plan to support anything else then W2K, WXP and Linux yet. > >> - Is colinux stable enough to run on a "production" system? I plan to >> consolidate 2 gateway-machines (one linux, one windows) into one >> physical machine and it would be cool to migrate the mostly idling >> linux-machine (only mail and ssh gatewaying) onto the higher-loaded >> windows-machine. basically, colinux would fit here very well, but i >> don`t know if it`s stable enough. > > Some people stated, that running colinux longer (some days?) can cause > some unpredicted events occuring. you can even read that there are still > some time problems. as you can check, there's 0.6.1 version out there, > so it's not thought for production. you can give that a try, but i > wouldn't. I'm working in a company that produces a lot of linux software, mysql, php, apache, perl, etc. Many of our customers can't support this kind of installation for reasons of policy, momentum, managability, etc. I have suggested that we might make a colinux installation to run the software we provide. Does anyone here have any comments on this? Sam |
From: Martin K. <ka...@po...> - 2004-10-26 20:03:37
|
Sam Liddicott wrote: > I'm working in a company that produces a lot of linux software, mysql, > php, apache, perl, etc. You're producing linux software? I'm sure I didn't understand what you mean. :-( > I have suggested that we might make a colinux installation to run the > software we provide. As I didn't understand what you do and what your customers can't I'm not sure if I really can comment this :-( But I wouldn't do it know. Just because colinux is still not the productive platform. It works great for me as devel, but I wouldn't run there PostgreSQL. And you noticed only software that works by the way on linux, too. You can still run in on Windows, Mac, ... So what do you think you can achieve using Linux instead of customer's native platforms and what load do you want dedicate to colinux? Why do you think colinux is better to support than a dedicated linux/*bsd machine? Regards, Martin |
From: Sam M. <pa...@gm...> - 2004-10-26 23:05:58
|
IMHO, coLinux would only be viable as a transition system to get an organisation used to using linux. I can't really comment as all organisations I have worked with have supported linux in some small way (even if it was a small linux server in a back office). My suggestion would be to set up a dedicated Linux box (not necesarily a full server, maybe just a workstation box) and use it to get started, surely the organisation could use one ancient machine (I'm assuming speed isn't an issue here) to test with. With the applications you're talking about ("mysql, php, apache, perl"), they run perfectly well under Windows, although Apache does suffer a performance hit. In reply to Martin's comment, coLinux is still really testing, not production. Postgres is also supported via Cygwin, which I would suggest is a bit more stable running a single linux process (ie just postgres) than running an entire Linux box, as would the case be with coLinux. It appears to me to be a massive misuse of resources. Last note on postgres is that I thought I saw development on a native server for Windows being developed somewhere. I'm not sure about this, so you might need to research it. A last item to note is if the box does start to have high CPU usage, I have seen comments noting that network connectivity has been lost. Whilst I haven't experienced it myself, it would be undesirable if your system became unresponsive to the outside world due to high CPU usage (ie a windows application chewing the cpu). Whilst the Windows box will usually stay online under this load, it will appear that your coLinux system has crashed from the network (ie won't be remotely accessible/respond to pings) So my recommendation is to use native applications where possible, because coLinux isn't (completely) stable. This means either using Windows ports, or installing a full linux system. Again, if the server is of importance, I would recommend Cygwin because it doesn't suffer from coLinux's network issues (it connects directly, instead of through TAP, etc) Hope it helps, Sam On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:03:30 +0200, Martin Kanich <ka...@po...> wrote: > Sam Liddicott wrote: > > I'm working in a company that produces a lot of linux software, mysql, > > php, apache, perl, etc. > You're producing linux software? I'm sure I didn't understand what you > mean. :-( > > > I have suggested that we might make a colinux installation to run the > > software we provide. > As I didn't understand what you do and what your customers can't I'm not > sure if I really can comment this :-( > But I wouldn't do it know. Just because colinux is still not the > productive platform. It works great for me as devel, but I wouldn't run > there PostgreSQL. And you noticed only software that works by the way on > linux, too. You can still run in on Windows, Mac, ... > So what do you think you can achieve using Linux instead of customer's > native platforms and what load do you want dedicate to colinux? Why do > you think colinux is better to support than a dedicated linux/*bsd machine? > > Regards, > Martin > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE > LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click > _______________________________________________ > coLinux-devel mailing list > coL...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/colinux-devel > |
From: <co...@ew...> - 2004-10-27 00:48:50
|
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Sam Moffatt wrote: > IMHO, coLinux would only be viable as a transition system to get an > organisation used to using linux. I like the way you think. > still really testing, not production. Postgres is also supported via > Cygwin, which I would suggest is a bit more stable running a single > linux process (ie just postgres) than running an entire Linux box, as > would the case be with coLinux. Your best bet is to try it. I have found through many open source projects that actively using an "experimental" environment for a production application goes a long way to move both products forward. If bugs arise on the experimental side, it can be researched and pinpointed. In many cases you can hunt down what in your production system is hanging and work around it, even if you have to comment the code with a big fat FIXME. It sounds like you're a programmer and certainly you have had to write code to get around another companies "bug." (we call this the windows syndrome). In my experience with colinux, it is quite stable for almost everything within the colinux environment. As long as your application(s) in colinux keep a relatively small memory footprint you should be ok. Network code is getting decent on colinux and it has been the point of much discussion on the list. Pings are down to the usec range instead of the ~15msec range in the 2.4 colinux tree and things are looking promising. > Last note on postgres is that I thought I saw development on a native > server for Windows being developed somewhere. I'm not sure about this, > so you might need to research it. If you're curious, search the postgres-announce list archives. Recently their weekly updates have had some fuzz about native windows compiling and being in beta. Their weekly updates give short project overviews and as a database developer, it is interesting to see where the (R)DBMS's are going and what to expect next. > A last item to note is if the box does start to have high CPU usage, I > have seen comments noting that network connectivity has been lost. > Whilst I haven't experienced it myself, it would be undesirable if > your system became unresponsive to the outside world due to high CPU > usage (ie a windows application chewing the cpu). Whilst the Windows > box will usually stay online under this load, it will appear that your > coLinux system has crashed from the network (ie won't be remotely > accessible/respond to pings) Have you experienced this specifically? Because colinux is effectively a kernel driver, it gets lots of priority. If you're curious, turn on "show kernel times" in taskmgr and watch the cpu graph. The red line is like UNIX's %sys usage. Run something cpu hungry in colinux and watch the graph. It will go 100% red-line if you let it meaning that almost all of the work is in the kernel. That being the case, even if a windows app completely hoses the box and services blowup, colinux may still be running normal without interruption. > So my recommendation is to use native applications where possible, > because coLinux isn't (completely) stable. This means either using > Windows ports, or installing a full linux system. Again, if the server > is of importance, I would recommend Cygwin because it doesn't suffer > from coLinux's network issues (it connects directly, instead of through > TAP, etc) If you will be rolling out a new system immediately, then I definitely agree. Your product needs time to be tested under colinux for a while before you decide it is stable. If you can run it without problems on your workstation for a few weeks without any difficult problems, then I would say go colinux! -- Eric Wheeler Vice President National Security Concepts, Inc. PO Box 3567 Tualatin, OR 97062 http://www.nsci.us/ Voice: (503) 293-7656 Fax: (503) 885-0770 |
From: Martin K. <ka...@po...> - 2004-10-27 08:12:18
|
co...@ew... wrote: >>Last note on postgres is that I thought I saw development on a native >>server for Windows being developed somewhere. I'm not sure about this, >>so you might need to research it. > > If you're curious, search the postgres-announce list archives. Recently > their weekly updates have had some fuzz about native windows compiling and > being in beta. Their weekly updates give short project overviews and as a > database developer, it is interesting to see where the (R)DBMS's are > going and what to expect next. Yes, PostgreSQL is in version 8.0 Beta 4 now and it works quite well for a developer :-) I didn't tried that with our product, which runs well on cygwin. I would take non-windows server for that, but I can't decide such things :-( >>A last item to note is if the box does start to have high CPU usage, I >>have seen comments noting that network connectivity has been lost. >>Whilst I haven't experienced it myself, it would be undesirable if >>your system became unresponsive to the outside world due to high CPU >>usage (ie a windows application chewing the cpu). Whilst the Windows >>box will usually stay online under this load, it will appear that your >>coLinux system has crashed from the network (ie won't be remotely >>accessible/respond to pings) > > Have you experienced this specifically? Dan wrote last time that there are some part in networking which suffers in switching from one context to another. This part is obviosly priority dependant - just change your priorities of colinux, *net-daemons and any other heavy loaded windows app. DAN: could you please create a small image (picture) of the networork path - from colinux to outter world? it could be nice to see what you (speak "me and those like me") want to understand :-) >>So my recommendation is to use native applications where possible, >>because coLinux isn't (completely) stable. This means either using >>Windows ports, or installing a full linux system. Again, if the server >>is of importance, I would recommend Cygwin because it doesn't suffer >>from coLinux's network issues (it connects directly, instead of through >>TAP, etc) > If you will be rolling out a new system immediately, then I definitely > agree. Your product needs time to be tested under colinux for a while > before you decide it is stable. If you can run it without problems on > your workstation for a few weeks without any difficult problems, then I > would say go colinux! I would say colinux is a good demo of linux and great tool for running two OSes for non-productive/non-commercial/non-critical use. |