Re: 8 hours tests ends with inconsistent DB.

[Trevor Warren <trevorwarren@yahoo.com>]

--- Tony Earnshaw <tonye@billy.demon.nl> wrote:

> Unknown chappie comes swanking in with all sorts of
> promises (yahoo, 50 
> Mio users, "I can do it for FLOSS, given the
> chance", funny use of 
> English) and immediately falls flat on his face,
[snip]

 Dear Toni,

   Please watch your words. Watch your language and ou
won't start another flame. As for the funny use of
English....you think just cause you use as as your
first language it make ur rendering of the same any
better. 

   As for falling "Flat on my Face" is
concerned.............you really haven't been thro the
pain of such regression and performance tests as a
result you know not the pain it takes to make an Open
Source app scale.
 
  Stop emnating the bullshit and stay within limits
please.

> whilst we know that 
> heavy loading works for you, Buchan and no doubt
> many others. You and 
> others attempt to pick him up, dust him off and
> start him off over 
> again. The whole thing is worth gold,
[snip]

 
  Aha.....Sneering again. Watchit bubba boy. You
getting over the fence here. Its very easy to throw
stones at others houses without acknowleding the
issues at home. Watch your step bubba boy.




> 
> Obviously "Properly configuring your database
> backend has always been 
> known to be needed" is being learned, in this case.
> The dialog is 
> fascinating.
[snip]

  Then...if thats the case and the system has been
poorly configured come up with suggestions. Stop
slapping around allegations. Easy to blame some
rookie. Get your arse up and running and be of some
bloody help. 




> 
> "Having proper hardwrae is a given". Obviously not,
> in OP's case :->>> 
> "The index corruption is questionable, since it is
> not clear  that the 
> OS is properly configured, since it is at the OS
> level that the memory 
> allocations fail". Could be, but I (with my
> minuscule and underloaded 
> systems) and others have had the same thing with
> 2.2.12.
[snip]

  Chappie....you seem to be in for some rant here. I
would end by requesting you to tone yourself down and
be helpful. After all my results were always being
published to the mailing list here.

   Stop being such a critic and accept the facts. If
the OS isn't configured....suggest params which can be
improvised on. Being a smart arse and criticising all
the way is why most FLOSS Zealots piss of the rest.

   Anyway...signing off for the last time. Ain't worth
doing any benchmarks when its all up for ridicule.

Trevor




> 
> As I said, let it run its course. I wonder what the
> acceptable 
> alternative would be. Sun, Netscape, IBM? Windows
> AD? For me, OL 2.2.12 
> (2.2.13 in the works) is an unbelievably stable,
> relatively easily 
> configured and versatile engine. And I'd like to see
> whatever assertions 
> as to the opposite proved wrong, *as well as* a
> final choice of 
> appropriate hardware, OS and configuration details.
> 
> Best,
> 
> --Tonni
> 
> -- 
> 
> We make out of the quarrel with others rhetoric
> but out of the quarrel with ourselves, poetry.
> 
> mail: tonye@billy.demon.nl
> http://www.billy.demon.nl
> 


=====
( >-                                           -< )
/~\    ______________________________________   /~\
|  \) /    Scaling FLOSS in the Enterprise   \ (/ |
|_|_  \        trevorwarren@yahoo.com        / _|_|
       \____________________________________/


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/