Large site - need advice

1 view
Skip to first unread message

JW Steve

unread,
Sep 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/21/99
to

I was just hired by a company that wants to
take a moderately sized web site and turn
it into a powerhouse web site. If all goes
well, we will be looking at having a couple
million of venture capital to make a real go
of this thing.

The site is currently being hosted by a dedicated
server company on a Sun box running Apache
1.3.9.

My questions are simple,
Should I bring the server in-house? If so,
what is the ideal platform and why?

Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out
what the big boys are running. IE, what does
EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source
for finding out general information about the
server configuration of these companies.

Thanks in advance,

_Steve


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

Miguel Cruz

unread,
Sep 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/21/99
to
JW Steve <maes...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out what the big boys are
> running. IE, what does EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source for
> finding out general information about the server configuration of these
> companies.

You can find out on your own by looking at the headers sent by their web
servers. Or, for a point-and-click approach, go to
http://www.netcraft.com/whats and enter the site's address.

miguel

I R A Darth Aggie

unread,
Sep 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/21/99
to
On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:57:33 GMT, JW Steve <maes...@my-deja.com>, in
<7s86cm$efr$1...@nnrp1.deja.com> wrote:

+ My questions are simple,
+ Should I bring the server in-house? If so,
+ what is the ideal platform and why?

Can you deal with the routine maintainence and administration? do you
*want* to?

+ Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out
+ what the big boys are running. IE, what does
+ EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source
+ for finding out general information about the
+ server configuration of these companies.

You mean like: <url:http://www.netcraft.com/whats/>

www.ebay.com is running microsoft stuff.
www.amazon.com is running netscape-commerce under digital unix.
www.sun.com is running netscape-enterprise under solaris.
www.hotmail is running apache 1.3.6 under freebsd.

James

--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
The Bill of Rights is paid in Responsibilities - Jean McGuire
To cure your perl CGI problems, please look at:
<url:http://www.perl.com/CPAN/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html>

John Imrie

unread,
Sep 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/21/99
to
>
> Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out
> what the big boys are running. IE, what does
> EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source
> for finding out general information about the
> server configuration of these companies.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> _Steve
>

http://www.netcraft.com/survey/

This should give you all you nead to know


rich jankowski

unread,
Sep 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/22/99
to
On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:57:33 GMT, JW Steve <maes...@my-deja.com> wrote:

<...>

>My questions are simple,


>Should I bring the server in-house? If so,

>what is the ideal platform and why?

Depends on a lot of factors. How much bandwidth is this going to
eat up? What are the costs of a dedicated line vs. the virtual site?
How competent are the admins at the dedicated site? How competent
are you or your admins at running the box?

I don't know if you're a consultant for this company or whatnot, but
your reputation is probably going to rest with the uptime of the dedicated
Web company.

About the platforms, I've run Apache on different UNIX flavors (FreeBSD,
HPUX, Solaris, Linux) all handling different types of load. I've never
really had any problems with any of them.

WindowsNT on the other hand... ;)

>Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out
>what the big boys are running. IE, what does
>EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source
>for finding out general information about the
>server configuration of these companies.

http://www.netcraft.com/whats/

Though I really wouldn't take a lot of those stats to heart. A firewall
can be in the way and give you a false response, what I would look at is

http://www.netcraft.com/survey/

--
rich jankowski
ri...@saturnlink.com

Ritzsky Online

unread,
Sep 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/22/99
to
I think alot of it depends on what you would like to do with the site. I am
the Director of Web Development for a huge corporate web site, with 6
Internet Domains, 3 Intranets and 2 Extranets. Because of the complexity of
it all we went with Microsoft products.

--

Hot Links:
http://www.ritzsky.com
http://bn.bfast.com/booklink/click?sourceid=7336284&categoryid=h

JW Steve <maes...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7s86cm$efr$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...


>
>
> I was just hired by a company that wants to
> take a moderately sized web site and turn
> it into a powerhouse web site. If all goes
> well, we will be looking at having a couple
> million of venture capital to make a real go
> of this thing.
>
> The site is currently being hosted by a dedicated
> server company on a Sun box running Apache
> 1.3.9.
>

> My questions are simple,
> Should I bring the server in-house? If so,
> what is the ideal platform and why?
>

> Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out
> what the big boys are running. IE, what does
> EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source
> for finding out general information about the
> server configuration of these companies.
>

Mark A. Fernandez

unread,
Sep 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/22/99
to
On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:57:33 GMT, JW Steve <maes...@my-deja.com> wrote:

>"The site is currently being hosted by a dedicated
>"server company on a Sun box running Apache
>"1.3.9.
>"
>"My questions are simple,
>"Should I bring the server in-house? If so,
>"what is the ideal platform and why?

The "ideal" platform is one that you're comfortable with and meets your
current and future needs. I can't imagine why Apache wouldn't serve well.
As for why this is the "ideal" platform, the answer is mostly personal
preference and partly economic. Apache's pricing is pretty damn hard to
beat, and the tech support can't be beat (unless you need real-time help
RIGHT NOW!).

You can run a web server of a Pentium 200 with Apache if you want, but the
performance is significantly better with multiple CPUs, and if you're
planning on e-commerce, you'll want a reliable server with scalability and
lots of horsepower, at least a RAID 5 configuration, 2GB RAM, and dual CPU.

If your company is capable of shelling out a couple million for the
project, they can certainly afford an enterprise server and to hire
personnel to support the server and develop the web site as well as
maintain the connectivity in-house. Outsource content if you have to, but
controlling the server is probably most prudent, particularly if you're
going to run an e-commerce site.

Damn, I wish I had that kind of a budget! ;)

Some people swear by Windows IIS (I swear *at* the damn thing), and some
people love Netscape Server (which is also very good, but I don't like
their licensing policy), and some still like Novel IntranetWare (not dead
yet, and it has some very nice features to it).

It's really a matter of what you're comfortable with and how well you can
administer that particular platform. The WORST thing you can do, IMO, is
to switch to a platform you're NOT comfortable with or knowledgable about
if you're responsible for administration of the site, regardless of how
"wonderful" others tell you that platform might be.

>"Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out
>"what the big boys are running.

Sure... Check out Net Netcraft at http://www.netcraft.co.uk/Survey/. At
this site you can type in any URL and find out not only what web server the
site is running, but also the OS platform. You'll notice that Solaris and
Apache aren't exactly underutilized as a web server/OS combination. ;)

There's other interesting information as well.

Andy Pearce

unread,
Sep 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/22/99
to
JW Steve <maes...@my-deja.com> writes:

> I was just hired by a company that wants to
> take a moderately sized web site and turn
> it into a powerhouse web site. If all goes
> well, we will be looking at having a couple
> million of venture capital to make a real go
> of this thing.
>

> The site is currently being hosted by a dedicated
> server company on a Sun box running Apache
> 1.3.9.
>
> My questions are simple,
> Should I bring the server in-house? If so,
> what is the ideal platform and why?
>

> Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out

> what the big boys are running. IE, what does
> EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source
> for finding out general information about the
> server configuration of these companies.

Many of the "big boys" are changing. Since no-one ever seems to mention it
in this group, I'll suggest it : take a look at the Zeus web server,
http://www.zeustechnology.com. Its fast, and scales to very large numbers
of virtual servers running on a single machine. Its also easy to manage.

Ok, having said that, I admit to having a slight bias as I work for HP on
Zeus stuff (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/990913/zeus_hp_al_1.html), but I
would still recommend checking it out.

Andy Pearce.


Arunas Salkauskas

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to

Ritzsky Online wrote in message ...

>I think alot of it depends on what you would like to do with the site. I
am
>the Director of Web Development for a huge corporate web site, with 6
>Internet Domains, 3 Intranets and 2 Extranets. Because of the complexity
of
>it all we went with Microsoft products.
>

I'm not sure if that's a good reason to go with Microsoft products, in fact
it sounds like exactly the wong reason. I use them for my stuff now,
(except for Apache) but only because everything is fairly simple my next
step is going to be linux simply because things are getting too complicated
to work reasonably under NT!

Heck, everytime you change/add something to the network settings, Microsoft
wants you to restart the whole computer - that's 5 minutes of down time for
the entire system, when you can, on most reasonable systems, just restart
the networking components in a couple of seconds. That alone precludes MS
products from anything beyond the desktop.

--
- Arunas Salkauskas
High Point Designs
www.highpointdesigns.com


Brian

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to

<clipped for brevities sake>

>www.ebay.com is running microsoft stuff.


eBay actually runs Apache 1.3.6 on Solaris.

Brian

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to

Ritzsky Online wrote in message ...
>I think alot of it depends on what you would like to do with the site. I
am
>the Director of Web Development for a huge corporate web site, with 6
>Internet Domains, 3 Intranets and 2 Extranets. Because of the complexity
of
>it all we went with Microsoft products.


Ha! I run 6 registered domains, a 12 node internel network (Including Sun,
Mac, Linux, NetBSD and W98), a two node external network, all running
Slackware 3.9 Linux 2.0.37. It runs 24/7 with the last reboot 18 weeks ago
(there wasn't a problem, I just changed something in the kernel).

Because of the complexity and requirement for high reliability, flexibility
and low maintenance, I choose NOT to go with Microsoft products.

The web is Unix/Linux/FreeBSD etc., not Microsoft. Most attempts to run
large Microsoft sites are a disaster, including Microsofts own sites (which
are a dog's breakfast). Microsoft's own "hotmail.com" runs FreeBSD rather
than NT4. eBay runs Solaris (SUN Unix) and Apache and it has to be the most
complicated and busiest sites in the world. No Microsoft there!

So next time you are looking for an Internet winner, think Unix and think
free - LINUX!

Best regards,

Brian

>
>--
>
>Hot Links:
>http://www.ritzsky.com
>http://bn.bfast.com/booklink/click?sourceid=7336284&categoryid=h
>
>JW Steve <maes...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:7s86cm$efr$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>>
>>

>> I was just hired by a company that wants to
>> take a moderately sized web site and turn
>> it into a powerhouse web site. If all goes
>> well, we will be looking at having a couple
>> million of venture capital to make a real go
>> of this thing.
>>
>> The site is currently being hosted by a dedicated
>> server company on a Sun box running Apache
>> 1.3.9.
>>
>> My questions are simple,
>> Should I bring the server in-house? If so,
>> what is the ideal platform and why?
>>
>> Secondly, does anyone know how I can find out
>> what the big boys are running. IE, what does
>> EBAY run, Amazon, etc. Is there a source
>> for finding out general information about the
>> server configuration of these companies.
>>

Ritzsky Online

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to
I never said it was perfect, there are other ways to do it I know, but for
what we do it works just fine.


--

http://dmoz.org/
http://www.punya.com
Arunas Salkauskas <arunas@an!m.org> wrote in message
news:37eb...@news.cadvision.com...


>
> Ritzsky Online wrote in message ...
> >I think alot of it depends on what you would like to do with the site. I
> am
> >the Director of Web Development for a huge corporate web site, with 6
> >Internet Domains, 3 Intranets and 2 Extranets. Because of the complexity
> of
> >it all we went with Microsoft products.
> >
>

Brian

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to
Ritzsky Online wrote in message ...
>I think alot of it depends on what you would like to do with the site. I
am
>the Director of Web Development for a huge corporate web site, with 6
>Internet Domains, 3 Intranets and 2 Extranets. Because of the complexity
of
>it all we went with Microsoft products.


"www.ritzsky.com is running Apache/1.3.6 (Win32) on NT4 or Windows 98"

By the way, I didn't realize Apache 1.3.6 was a Microsoft product. What is
that about?

Brian

Ritzsky Online

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to
LOL, always got to be someone saying their dick is bigger! I said it
depends on what you are doing, and what you require. I never said that
there were not alternate methods. I never said it was perfect either. You
mentioned HotMail, have you ever tried to migrate something like that, hell,
I would leave it the way it was too! You want to know the real reason why
everyone is running linux, apache, bsd, because they are free, and who wants
to change after it is all working! There is nothing complicated about the
Apache site, actually they have a pretty simple setup, they just get alot
of traffic! Don't get me wrong I am not knocking anyone or anything. I
have used RedHat plenty of times with no complaints. It just depends on
what you want to do and what you plan on doing in the future. I'll tell you
what I think is funny, 6/7 years ago BBS'ers used to argue about the same
thing, only then it was-- Wildcat, ProBoard, or RA.

Scott


> Ha! I run 6 registered domains, a 12 node internel network (Including Sun,
> Mac, Linux, NetBSD and W98), a two node external network, all running
> Slackware 3.9 Linux 2.0.37. It runs 24/7 with the last reboot 18 weeks ago
> (there wasn't a problem, I just changed something in the kernel).
>
> Because of the complexity and requirement for high reliability,
flexibility
> and low maintenance, I choose NOT to go with Microsoft products.
>
> The web is Unix/Linux/FreeBSD etc., not Microsoft. Most attempts to run
> large Microsoft sites are a disaster, including Microsofts own sites
(which
> are a dog's breakfast). Microsoft's own "hotmail.com" runs FreeBSD rather
> than NT4. eBay runs Solaris (SUN Unix) and Apache and it has to be the
most
> complicated and busiest sites in the world. No Microsoft there!
>
> So next time you are looking for an Internet winner, think Unix and think
> free - LINUX!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Brian
>
> >

Ritzsky Online

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to
You Like? About time Apache decided to make a Windows Version. I run
Apache on Windows98 from my private server here at home. I am not going to
spend tons of money on a hobby and I get the best of both worlds! I never
claimed allegiance to either side I just go with what works for me and my
requirements. Now you are going to tell me that you are still using DOS for
all your applications right?

Scott


--

http://dmoz.org/
http://www.punya.com
Brian <sub...@post.com> wrote in message
news:1YTG3.48$1M1.3...@news.bctel.net...

Brian

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to

rich jankowski wrote in message
<36B588D3B79C9F96.844448F5...@lp.airnews.net>...

>On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 16:12:06 -0700, Brian <sub...@post.com> wrote:
>>
>><clipped for brevities sake>
>>
>>>www.ebay.com is running microsoft stuff.
>>
>>
>>eBay actually runs Apache 1.3.6 on Solaris.
>
>Ebay is running IIS on NT. Telnet into port 80 and have a look.


This is what Netcraft reports:

ebay.com is running Apache/1.3.6 (Unix) on Solaris

Richard Scranton

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to

That doesn't appear to be true.

ScrantR: lynx -dump -head http://www.ebay.com/
HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Server: Microsoft-IIS/3.0
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 03:13:26 GMT
Content-Type: text/html
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Last-Modified: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 03:00:02 GMT
Content-Length: 17652

Brian wrote:
>
> <clipped for brevities sake>
>
> >www.ebay.com is running microsoft stuff.
>
> eBay actually runs Apache 1.3.6 on Solaris.
>

> >www.amazon.com is running netscape-commerce under digital unix.
> >www.sun.com is running netscape-enterprise under solaris.
> >www.hotmail is running apache 1.3.6 under freebsd.

--

You can have it fast, good, and cheap. Pick any two.
_________________________________________________________________
<a href="http://www.netcom.com/~scrantr/index.html"> web page </a>
<a href="mailto:scr...@ix.netcom.com"> email </a>

Arunas Salkauskas

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to
Hmm, sure, that's why I'm still using NT. I just thought it was humorous
how you phrased the _reason_ for using M$ software...or is that the reason
it's more complex? Now that I read your post again, I'm not sure which way
you meant it, that you run Microsoft stuff because it's more complex?

Time flies like and arrow, fruit flies like bananas...

--
- Arunas Salkauskas
High Point Designs
www.highpointdesigns.com

Ritzsky Online wrote in message ...


>I never said it was perfect, there are other ways to do it I know, but for
>what we do it works just fine.
>
>

>Arunas Salkauskas <arunas@an!m.org> wrote in message
>news:37eb...@news.cadvision.com...
>>

>> Ritzsky Online wrote in message ...
>> >I think alot of it depends on what you would like to do with the site.
I
>> am
>> >the Director of Web Development for a huge corporate web site, with 6
>> >Internet Domains, 3 Intranets and 2 Extranets. Because of the
complexity
>> of
>> >it all we went with Microsoft products.
>> >
>>

Brian

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to
telnet ebay.com 80 <enter>

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
</HEAD><BODY>
<ADDRESS>Apache/1.3.6 Server at ebay.com Port 80</ADDRESS>
</BODY></HTML>


Richard Scranton wrote in message <37EC3E13...@ix.netcom.com>...

Brian

unread,
Sep 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/24/99
to
I believe they would be running their Oracle 8i Enterprise database on
Solaris, certainly not NT4 et al.

rich jankowski wrote in message ...
>On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 18:56:37 -0700, Brian <sub...@post.com> wrote:
>
><...>


>
>>This is what Netcraft reports:
>>
>>ebay.com is running Apache/1.3.6 (Unix) on Solaris
>

>Hmm, you're right, though http://ebay.com just redirects you to
www.ebay.com,
>which is NT. Maybe they're going to migrate to Solaris?
>
>--
>rich jankowski
>ri...@saturnlink.com

rich jankowski

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/25/99
to
On Fri, 24 Sep 1999 16:12:06 -0700, Brian <sub...@post.com> wrote:
>
><clipped for brevities sake>
>
>>www.ebay.com is running microsoft stuff.
>
>
>eBay actually runs Apache 1.3.6 on Solaris.

Ebay is running IIS on NT. Telnet into port 80 and have a look.

--
rich jankowski
ri...@saturnlink.com

rich jankowski

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/25/99
to

Ritzsky Online

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/25/99
to
Yea complicated was not a good word to use, got a lot of heat off that one.
I should have said "our requirements are better filled by the Microsoft
platform".

Scott

--

news:37ec...@news.cadvision.com...

Richard Scranton

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/25/99
to
If you point a browser at ebay.com, you are immediately
redirected to www.ebay.com, which is a different host,
running bad bits from Redmond. www.ebay.com is serviced
by a herd of NT boxes, which explains their frequent
outages.

Brian wrote:
>
> telnet ebay.com 80 <enter>
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> </HEAD><BODY>
> <ADDRESS>Apache/1.3.6 Server at ebay.com Port 80</ADDRESS>
> </BODY></HTML>
>
> Richard Scranton wrote in message <37EC3E13...@ix.netcom.com>...
> >
> >That doesn't appear to be true.
> >
> >ScrantR: lynx -dump -head http://www.ebay.com/
> >HTTP/1.0 200 OK
> >Server: Microsoft-IIS/3.0
> >Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 03:13:26 GMT
> >Content-Type: text/html
> >Accept-Ranges: bytes
> >Last-Modified: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 03:00:02 GMT
> >Content-Length: 17652
> >
> >
> >

> >Brian wrote:
> >>
> >> <clipped for brevities sake>
> >>
> >> >www.ebay.com is running microsoft stuff.
> >>
> >> eBay actually runs Apache 1.3.6 on Solaris.
> >>

Richard Scranton

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/25/99
to
ScrantR: lynx -head -dump http://ebay.com/
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 22:35:40 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.6 (Unix)
Last-Modified: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 16:13:34 GMT
ETag: "4f991-f5-37caadae"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 245
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html

ScrantR: lynx -dump http://ebay.com/

REFRESH(0 sec): [1]http://www.ebay.com/

[2]www.eBay.com

References

1. http://www.ebay.com/
2. http://www.ebay.com/

Brian

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/25/99
to

Richard Scranton wrote in message <37ED4E78...@ix.netcom.com>...

>If you point a browser at ebay.com, you are immediately
>redirected to www.ebay.com, which is a different host,
>running bad bits from Redmond. www.ebay.com is serviced
>by a herd of NT boxes, which explains their frequent
>outages.


They have experienced some amazing downtimes (days at a time). I expected
they were doing either a major equipment replacement or software overhaul.

Wonder which way there going?

Wait till they try out Microsoft's online support. HAHAhahahahahahahahaha.
Poor bastards.

Best regards,

Brian

Ritzsky Online

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/25/99
to
LOL, I don't think they have to wait in line for the like the rest of us do,
I am sure they have a dedicated Microsoft guy standing around. If I made
the money they do I know I would have one or two in my hip pocket.

Scott

--

Brian <sub...@post.com> wrote in message

news:UBdH3.61$dq1.3...@news.bctel.net...

JDR

unread,
Sep 27, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/27/99
to
There was a big thing a couple of months back where ebay was having problems
with Oracle on their Sun E10000. Microsoft came up with some article on
technet about how if you wanted true reliability you should go with an NT
solution. It looks as Brian is correct--their backend runs on Solaris,
their frontend runs on NT/IIS.

Brian wrote in message ...


>I believe they would be running their Oracle 8i Enterprise database on
>Solaris, certainly not NT4 et al.
>
>rich jankowski wrote in message ...

Ritzsky Online

unread,
Sep 27, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/27/99
to
Isn't that when they crashed and were all over the news?

Scott

--

JDR <jri...@navisite.com.mil> wrote in message
news:7sop8c$7v...@news1.navisite.net...

Brian

unread,
Sep 27, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/27/99
to
Hi Rich:

rich jankowski wrote in message ...

>On Mon, 27 Sep 1999 17:57:28 -0400, JDR <jri...@navisite.com.mil> wrote:
>>There was a big thing a couple of months back where ebay was having
problems
>>with Oracle on their Sun E10000. Microsoft came up with some article on
>>technet about how if you wanted true reliability you should go with an NT
>>solution. It looks as Brian is correct--their backend runs on Solaris,
>>their frontend runs on NT/IIS.

I predict that won't last long (the NT part, I mean).

>I wonder if they actually went with a M$ product for their back-end? I've
>been running UNIX boxes with Oracle for a few years, and I've never seen
>any decent Oracle admin suggest running the DB on NT.


I can't imagine it myself but don't forget MS is pounding out these MSCE
(whatever) techs by the thousands. They are cheap and totally dependant upon
Microsoft for their direct line to the source (they never see it but they
hear about it a lot).

I have run into a few of these people and while they are well-meaning, most
of them don't have a clue.

Perhaps I'll e-mail eBay and ask - what could it hurt?

>I seriously doubt if they had a E10000, that Microsoft could design
>a solution as powerful, the E10000 scales up to 64 processors, if I
>remember correctly.


>rich jankowski
>ri...@saturnlink.com

Best regards,

Brian

rich jankowski

unread,
Sep 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/28/99
to
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999 17:57:28 -0400, JDR <jri...@navisite.com.mil> wrote:
>There was a big thing a couple of months back where ebay was having problems
>with Oracle on their Sun E10000. Microsoft came up with some article on
>technet about how if you wanted true reliability you should go with an NT
>solution. It looks as Brian is correct--their backend runs on Solaris,
>their frontend runs on NT/IIS.

I wonder if they actually went with a M$ product for their back-end? I've


been running UNIX boxes with Oracle for a few years, and I've never seen
any decent Oracle admin suggest running the DB on NT.

I seriously doubt if they had a E10000, that Microsoft could design


a solution as powerful, the E10000 scales up to 64 processors, if I
remember correctly.

--
rich jankowski
ri...@saturnlink.com

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages