Rebooting is for Windows

#1

Post by aoos » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 8:35 PM UTC

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#2

Post by nailer » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 9:59 PM UTC

Yes. Shutting down every app, the OS kernel, and firmware, and restarting them for anything beyond a major OS upgrade is a reminder that Windows remains a desktop class OS.

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#3

Post by tedunangst » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 9:59 PM UTC

Not to say it's not cool, but saying "Look how much cooler linux is because of ksplice" is kind of silly considering determina was doing this years ago for Windows.

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#4

Post by kgo » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 10:09 PM UTC

Eventually your hardware will fail. If you can't even safely reboot your machines under controlled circumstances, you've already lost the uptime battle.

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#5

Post by pavs » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 10:30 PM UTC

One of the comment refers to netcraft for example of long Linux uptimes. According to http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html Windows have better or just as good uptime as Linux servers. (maybe I am missing something)

The last time I used a MS web-server was ~10 years ago. I have almost exclusively used debian/ubuntu servers most of the time. Apart from the Linux fanboyism, what advantages does MSFT have as a server OS?

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#6

Post by lurkinggrue » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 10:39 PM UTC

kgo wrote: post #4

Eventually your hardware will fail. If you can't even safely reboot your machines under controlled circumstances, you've already lost the uptime battle.

I have run into problems where the machine would not survive reboot after updates but did not find this out after months.

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#7

Post by rbanffy » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 10:41 PM UTC

kgo wrote: post #4

Eventually your hardware will fail. If you can't even safely reboot your machines under controlled circumstances, you've already lost the uptime battle.

And that's one point for specialized hardware. On a zSeries mainframe, CPU errors are detected on-the-fly, faulty CPUs are deactivated and their processes migrated to functioning CPUs.

They cost a lot, but they deliver a lot of confidence too.

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#8

Post by rbanffy » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 10:46 PM UTC

lurkinggrue wrote: post #6

kgo wrote: post #4

Eventually your hardware will fail. If you can't even safely reboot your machines under controlled circumstances, you've already lost the uptime battle.

I have run into problems where the machine would not survive reboot after updates but did not find this out after months.

It's OK to reboot from time to time. What is not OK is to have a reboot imposed on you when you would rather continue running. It's not a huge disruption to reboot a cluster node, as long as the rest of the cluster takes the load.

Rebooting makes sure the filesystem is properly scrubbed, temporary files are removed and any stale data in memory gets removed.

Uptime competitions are pointless.

But forced downtime (Windows Update-style) is unacceptable.

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#9

Post by gmlk » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 10:47 PM UTC

Well, that is at least one of the advantages of Common Lisp… ;)

Re: Rebooting is for Windows

#10

Post by ajg1977 » Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 11:36 PM UTC

While Windows has (and probably always will be) an OS that requires reboots for certain patches, it seems a bit biased of the article to ignore much of the work that's been done in recent (>= Server 2003) versions of the OS to minimize this, while highlighting improvements such as KSlice in Linux.