*BSD News Article 57466


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!jkh
From: jkh@violet.berkeley.edu (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Hubbard's article in BYTE
Date: 15 Dec 1995 10:19:01 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <4ari2l$ipe@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <4aqced$alc@interport.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.berkeley.edu

In article <4aqced$alc@interport.net>,
David Tay <davidtay@interport.net> wrote:
>Loved the article in FreeBSD. Very well written. <asskissing end>

Thanks - and no kisses necessary!  I did it just to spread the word a
little wider and, if others would like to join this emerging trend
by mobbing other magazines with FreeBSD article submissions, I would
not mind at all!  For the first person to get into Dr. Dobbs or
PC Magazine, in fact, my own lips are puckered and waiting. :-)

>I do have one question, though. In the article, you said that one should 
>add 16mb of RAM for every 10 simultaenous FTP sessions. If that's true, 
>then how does ftp.cdrom.com squeeze 400 users into an 128mb machine?

Unfortunately, I didn't say this.  My editor did. :-(  They also made
up the interesting new term of "ISP Pentium", which made my hair stand
straight up when I saw it. :(  Perhaps DELL will play ball by actually
making one now and I won't have to feel so bad! :)

What I originally said was that for every 10 *interactive users* you should
consider having 16MB of memory, with the assumption being that said users
will be running emacs, reading mail and newsgroups, compiling versions
of "crack", so on and so forth.  Then in another paragraph I talked about
configuring your machine for FTP users.  In editing down my 3000 words
to 1900, they managed to smash the two concepts together and ended up
suggesting that one needed to spend the equivalent of Bolivia's gross national
product just to get a couple of hundred FTP users!

Ah well, at least they didn't do the opposite and suggest that you could get
400 users into 16MB of memory - that would have been *really* bad! :-)

In retrospect, the fault was mine.  I didn't leave enough time to get changes
incorporated back into the galleys I received.  I sent back the changes, but
they didn't have enough time to get them in, evidently.

Live and learn!  Thanks for the kind plug, anyway! :)

					Jordan