Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: asian1 on January 31, 2003, 04:32:54 PM
-
Hello
On several webhosting companies, the customer can choose "dedicated server" with various hardware / OS (Mac OSX, Linux, BSD etc).
Is it possible to use an AmigaOne computer or several AmigaOne clusters as web server?
Can AmigaOne webserver be connected to CISCO 12000 + OC-192 (10 Gbps) Internet backbone?
What is the best "secure" OS for such Server?
Is it Linux for PowerPC, MacOS X or AmigaOS 4?
Thank's.
-
There should be nothing technical stopping it
Linux is perfectly capable of running a web server, and on minimal hardware. A G3 would i think even be overkill for a lot of web applications
perhaps not if you have a lot of database accessing and a busy site
a 10Gbps backbone would be nice for a busy site too
That way the only restrictions are on your hardware, which is something you can control. perhaps a 100mbit ethernet card would be very easy. I can see the linux side working well
On a related topic and I hope I don't hijack this thread, does anyone have AmiTCP experience? I know it was BSD based and even had some of the BSD file layout in its directories. Was the httpd in amitcp related in any way to apache?
I'm only asking out of curiosity and hobby factor, not expecting it to fully function like new apaches. Much like running a web server on an amiga the reason its fun is just to see 'can it be done'
-
What is the best "secure" OS for such Server?
Is it Linux for PowerPC, MacOS X or AmigaOS 4?
Thank's.
Forgive me, I missed the last section of your question here.
AmigaOS 4 is an unknown as yet. It may be very good as its a very different system to common known ones. Security through obscurity is a weakness however and as such I would just mark that as "unknown" for now
Linux can be made very secure, and OSX also can be. Both have strong kernel based firewalls which can be configured to disallow or allow everything with flexible.
OSX running on an amigaOne is also an unknown. perhaps its possible, by copying roms and having a dedicated person provide the support. Apple have no drivers for amigaOne hardware. That would have to be written.
Perhaps a good hacker can whip up some code. That's not so reliable however as a happening. Not unless you are said hacker :).
Linux as I understand already is working on the amigaOne? That would be my choice. Not only does it already work, but you have full control over it. If you wanted you could completely recompile the kernel to a different state so breaking in is difficult for scripts.
All opinions and I may be wrong in points. I'm sure others will correct me!
-
yes it should, run linux on it though!
:-)
-
an interesting sub-topic for your post would be if you used Linux on an AmigaOne, can you make a 'beowulf cluster' out of it? that would be cool, not unlike the 'render farms' used with Lightwave of old. .
http://www.fysik.dtu.dk/CAMP/cluster-howto.html
Now, the first challenge is to own ONE AmigaOne, let alone several, of course. :)
kevin orme
amiga university
www.amigau.com
-
gimme gigabit ethernet if I'm building a web server with that kind of backbone... for that I'm sorry to say both A1/Pegasos are ill equipped...
-
Considering untested nature of Amiga.one hardware I would not yet consider24/7 use for it. I assume when time goes by some people do so and report results but in meanwhile I would suggest you using better tested alternatives.
-
amigaone & pegasos are probably best for workstation use, i think
:-) IMHO
-
What is the best "secure" OS for such Server?
They say OpenBSD (http://www.openbsd.org/) is the most secure (http://www.openbsd.org/security.html) OS (not linux :-P)
-
Depends on how serious you are!
There is absolutely no reason why you can have a LAMP, LATP or any other configuration of server on an AmigaONE running Linux.
Given that you can load it up with 2Gb of RAM and have multiple 100Mb ethernet cards or even GigE the only concern you would have would be would the processor be able to keep up? The answer is yes.
I have a webserver that takes several million pageviews per day running on a 300Mhz PPC RS/6000 ( 604 chip ) with only 512Mb RAM and it holds up lovely it uses four 100Mb ethernet cards to connect into the network and runs a cluster of four apache servers. This sits behind a server that uses dns redirection to round-robin around the ip addresses. AnyNet or something.
The web, unless you have complex server side includes or complex query, is a mostly data oriented operation ( which is why mainframes and mid-range servers are designed around data operation and data speed rather than raw processor power ) so make sure you have at least two drives, both the fastest you can buy and set up one to mirror the other.
Then run a minimal linux installation either behind someone elses firewall or running its own firewall and you will be able to manage very well.
The AmigaONE has been through extensive testing so don't worry too much on that point.
I think "sixgirls" does machine hosting so there is a good possibility.
Don't worry overmuch about the BSD vs Linux bigotry uh sorry "debate" because both do very well thank you very much.
Simplest way to test it is to have at least two other boxes connected up on the same network to it running many concurrent curl downloads to see what percentage of cycles and memory goes to apache, mysql etc. This helps you identify bottlenecks in your code - you may need to lighten your queries to stop bottlenecking on mySQL or you might want to decrease the amount of processing code you have in your PHP ( or EJBs or whatever you use ).
AmigaONE boards are fine for rack-mounting too.
Ignore the FUD, get one and get playing! :-D
-
differance is that 604 chip is 64bit... its got better memory management...and its a time proven platform... not an unproven machine.
I'd wouldnt buy an AmigaOne or a Pegasos(right now!) to use as a webserver until their tested and bugs can be worked out... their not tested...this 'april' fix implimented in hardware apperantly is only done to the pegasos... I dunno about the AmigaOne... that could cause issues if it hasnt been corrected( is it?) ...
I wouldnt call it FUD to say a non-tested system with a solderd on/socketed g3 600mhz..and questionable chipset wouldnt be the best choice for a reliable web server...
In a few months when all the facts can be seen about these bugs/etc if they are minimal/etc I'd say ok.
compareing an RS/6000 to an AmigaONE is like comparing a ferarri to a yugo...
-
"I'd never buy an AmigaOne or a Pegasos to use as a webserver ... their not tested...this 'april' fix implimented in hardware apperantly is only done to the pegasos... I dunno about the AmigaOne... that could cause issues if it hasnt been corrected( is it?) ... "
Do you know what the April chip fixes? Can you explain precisely how without the April chip somehow magically it is going to have an effect on data transfer between an ethernet card and the rest of the system? If not, dont bother.
"I wouldnt call it FUD to say a non-tested system with a solderd on g3 600mhz..and questionable chipset wouldnt be the best choice for a reliable web server."
Oh come on, what you think the solder is going to come loose? Questionable chipset? Questionable how? Sheesh. Non tested by whom??
Finally I am running in 32 bit mode on that lil old 604 and it is slower than the g3@600Mhz according to benchmark tests already done.
If you aren't going to be precise then it frankly smacks of FUD. Like alluding to the fact that the Amstrad 512 didnt ship with a fan so the hard drive might melt.
Ive still got visions now of solder coming loose or melting under the strain.
:-D
-
Do you know what the April chip fixes? Can you explain precisely how without the April chip somehow magically it is going to have an effect on data transfer between an ethernet card and the rest of the system? If not, dont bother.
April is fixing an IDE issue last I read... therefore it could effect disk access... that most certinly effect a server of any kind..
Oh come on, what you think the solder is going to come loose? Questionable chipset? Questionable how? Sheesh. Non tested by whom??
not tested by anyone... show me a serious review on the board? and I'm not talking about some zealot I'm talking about a normal technical site reviewing it.
Finally I am running in 32 bit mode on that lil old 604 and it is slower than the g3@600Mhz according to benchmark tests already done.
speed isnt everything... I'd take stability over speed in a server every time..unless its a media server :P
If you aren't going to be precise then it frankly smacks of FUD. Like alluding to the fact that the Amstrad 512 didnt ship with a fan so the hard drive might melt.
IBM .v. MIA ... IBM .v. Eyetech ... that smacks of FUD
Ive still got visions now of solder coming loose or melting under the strain.
I've seen it happen to solderd on cyrix chips used in cheap POS terminals... its not a pretty sight...
-
"compareing an RS/6000 to an AmigaONE is like comparing a ferarri to a yugo..."
I think that is overselling the RS/6000 significantly. I would say like comparing a Maserati Biturbo ( expensive, huge depreciation and fun for all the family performance ) with an Alfa Romeo Spider 2.0.
-
April is fixing an IDE issue last I read... therefore it could effect disk access... that most certinly effect a server of any kind..
And yet the demonstration of it happening on an A1 has not been shown at least in public by anything other than a zealot and in fact not even by a zealot. ;-)
Would you call Tom a zealout? Or MAIs testing engineers zealouts? Hmmm?
No its this whole A1 is an unknown factor, untested, no April chip fud bandwagon that is going along. It would be nice to see some details of what exactly it fixes and some EVIDENCE that it impacts the A1 board for once but that is OT.
I compared the A1 with IBM 43P hardware for a very good reason. Firstly the A1@600Mhz benchmarks at 30% increase in speed worst case over the 43P ( Yes it would be nice to see some public tests results I'll see what I can arrange ) and secondly it is demonstration that PowerPC chips are lower rates than the current 2GHz Intel based systems can cope with a reasonable load.
What you get in the A1 package, XE or SE is superior to what I have in my 43p ( rated 332 Mhz not 300Mhz just looked on the front cover ).
Plus when you look in the 43p there are surface mounted ( soldered! ) chips everywhere and that has done quite a few years of service now. Must have been 5 years since i bought it.
If you really piss your pants about surface mount chips go and get an XE.
But Ive seen chips work their way out of sockets before now! Quick front page news! Better not buy socketed chips anyone ;-)
-
No its this whole A1 is an unknown factor, untested, no April chip fud bandwagon that is going along. It would be nice to see some details of what exactly it fixes and some EVIDENCE that it impacts the A1 board for once but that is OT.
I want evidence 'either way' ... I want to see a good review... I read things from one source it says one thing... another source says another... they all say differant things... I'd like to actually see someone do a non-zealous non-political-motivated review on it... and tom and some mia engineers bieng connected to this with vested intrests in selling their chipsets are not what I call un-biased...
about the RS/6000 I dont claim its any faster...I'm sure it is slower...but for a webserver speed isnt everything...bieng able to handle a wide load of many users/etc matters more...but I trust what your saying about it...I think your on the money with the speed/etc...
I really am not a zealot either way and I'd like to see an unbiased review of Pegasos/A1 in a server enviornment with Linux on both of them...and see who does what..
-
@mips_proc
"I want evidence 'either way' ... I want to see a good review... I "
Yep. Me too, and Id rather see well documented /objective/ evidence either way before I see any more "AmigaONE doesn't have the April chip " implying that the AmigaONE is somehow fatally flawed.
Sure there may be a flaw, but how it impacts system stability or performance or manifests itself whilst running an operating system is totally undocumented - at least in the public and private domains I have access to. I see a lot of hype but not a lot of meat on the bone.
I want to see a technical review of Pegasos and AmigaONE SE and XE variants on a trusted third party site done by trusted engineering test staff but the only problem is are anyone other than zealots going to buy these boards? Probably not. :-(
"but for a webserver speed isnt everything...bieng able to handle a wide load of many users/etc matters more...but "
Definately.
Enjoy your weekend!
-
mips_proc wrote:
.this 'april' fix implimented in hardware apperantly is only done to the pegasos...
The difference is that the fix on the AmigaOne wasn't given a fancy name. Other than that, there isn't anything in this April chip that isn't in the AmigaOne fix...
I personally like May better than April - the wether tends to be better in May :-D
-
>Other than that, there isn't anything in this April
>chip that isn't in the AmigaOne fix...
Why not tell us how and where you did test the
AmigaOne board? What did you use to test it?
-
Rogue wrote:
The difference is that the fix on the AmigaOne wasn't given a fancy name. Other than that, there isn't anything in this April chip that isn't in the AmigaOne fix...
Well.. It's good to see that there are experienced Hw professionals on making that system too. But I allways thought you at Hyperion were only supposed to do game ports, not to be specialized on designing and testing hardware? :-D
-
mips_proc wrote:
differance is that 604 chip is 64bit... its got better memory management...and its a time proven platform... not an unproven machine.
So the 604 is a chip, but the 750CXe is a platform? Come ooonnnnnnnn. And no way can you argue that the G3 (and G4) chips currently on the market are untested and unproven; at least, not if you're being honest and not trying to win a losing argument with fudge and innuendo.
As for the 604 being 64-bit, it's high time you read (and digested and understood) something like
this (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/852569B20050FF778525699600719DF2/$file/6xx_pem.pdf). If the maker says it's 32-bit, then I tend to believe the maker. Not you.
Gentle hint: next time you make a statement, back it up with credible documents/reasoned proof. Next time you use a comparative, tell people what you're comparing with.
(solder coming loose)
I've seen it happen to solderd on cyrix chips used in cheap POS terminals... its not a pretty sight...
Eurgh. However, there's little danger of that with the A1: PPC chips don't run anywhere near as hot as comparable x86 ones.
-
JoannaK wrote:
But I allways thought you at Hyperion were only supposed to do game ports, not to be specialized on designing and testing hardware? :-D
Hyperion is part of the hardware testing team . Moreover, if you don't know the hardware how in the name of sanity are you going to write/port software to it? Especially if that software happens to be an OS?
-
Is it possible to use an AmigaOne computer or several AmigaOne clusters as web server?
Yes this is easily done using Linux. Just compile Apache and away you go. Use a Cisco CSS1100 for load balancing and/or session persistance.
On OS4 you will have to check out the Amiga Apache folk who I believe anounced that they would be supporting OS4 - check out their site. Again just use a CSS1100 for your LB/SP requirements.
In these dot.com bust days you can pick up CSS1100's on ebay quite cheap.
-
Dagon wrote:
What is the best "secure" OS for such Server?
They say OpenBSD (http://www.openbsd.org/) is the most secure (http://www.openbsd.org/security.html) OS (not linux :-P)
No, "they" say the most secure OS is one which is kept up to date with all the patches and properly configured.
-
No, "they" say the most secure OS is one which is kept up to date with all the patches and properly configured.
Well there is an openBSD host sitting on the internet for quite some time waiting to be hacked and with prize money attached to it.
There are also current patched hosts of many OS flavours that are being hacked every day!
It's no good having a fully patched host if you give it a root password of 'password'.
-
"Well.. It's good to see that there are experienced Hw professionals on making that system too. But I allways thought you at Hyperion were only supposed to do game ports, not to be specialized on designing and testing hardware? "
Ah oh fountain of fud, what fun you are.
To suggest that MAI do not have the expertise in hardware design and testing to come out with TeronCX, TeronPX, Artica* and many other hardware products not only denies their current portfolio of delivery but it also denies the credentials of the staff that work there. As if it was ever in doubt!
Secondly to imply, as you do here, that Hyperion are somehow just a bunch of game porters is further to turn the FUD screw and is doing them a subtle discourtesy but a discourtesy nonetheless.
I wonder, what are your engineering credentials ( assuming of course you have any ) that makes you think that testing hardware cannot be done by people that actually use that hardware for the purpose that was intended by it? I don't want a link to something you just read on the web I want to know what your experience and credentials are that you think people should really listen to your opinion without substantiation?
Im sure I would rightly get a whole bunch of screaming loonies on here having a go at me if I said "but I thought you at BPlan were only supposed to do flawed accelerator cards, not to be specialised in designing and testing complete motherboards?".
If your motives werent so transparent every time you posted Joanna I would be suspicous of them.
-
No, "they" say the most secure OS is one which is kept up to date with all the patches and properly configured.
By that argument a properly configured and patched Windows (any version) system is just as stable as a properly configured and patched Unix system.
The whole idea behind OpenBSD is that security is built right into the system and the code is audited for bugs, so there are still exploits that will work even with a fully patched and hardened system on (otherOS) but not on OpenBSD because of this.
-
>that makes you think that testing hardware cannot
>be done by people that actually use that hardware
>for the purpose that was intended by it?
Hyperion already was wrong the last time they said
that there are no bugs in Articia. So why should
somebody trust them this time?
-
"The whole idea behind OpenBSD is that security is built right into the system and the code is audited for bugs, so there are still exploits that will work even with a fully patched and hardened system on (otherOS) but not on OpenBSD because of this."
So because OpenBSD is audited and has security built in ( as do all Unixes to one degree or another ) it means that all other systems can be exploited?
Or are you saying that OpenBSD cannot be broken into regardless of patch level ( not credible ) or are you saying that Linux does not undergo security reviews ( wrong ) or are you saying that no other OS has security built in ( wrong ) or are you saying that OS with ESMs are not as secure ( wrong )?
I've lost count of the number of security holes that have had to be patched with Apache that are security holes regardless of host OS ( including BSD ).
Any system is proportionally more vulnerable the more back level its security PATCHES (typo) are.
Nah, I think that OpenBSD, fearful of Linux popularity has decided to build up a wee bit of mythology around itself to help it survive. Encrypting swap aside ( as if you could really get to it ).
Plus, what idiot runs an out of the box non "hard" Linux distro?
From http://www.developer.com/open/article.php/990711
AIX
10 vulnerabilities[6 remote, 3 local, 1 both]
Debian GNU/Linux
13 vulnerabilities[1 remote, 12 local] + 1 Linux kernel vulnerability[1 local]
FreeBSD
24 vulnerabilities[12 remote, 9 local, 3 both]
HP-UX
25 vulnerabilities[12 remote, 12 local, 1 both]
Mandrake Linux
17 vulnerabilities[5 remote, 12 local] + 12 Linux kernel vulnerabilities[5 remote, 7 local]
OpenBSD
13 vulnerabilities[7 remote, 5 local, 1 both]
Red Hat Linux
28 vulnerabilities[5 remote, 22 local, 1 unknown] + 12 Linux kernel vulnerabilities[6 remote, 6 local]
Solaris
38 vulnerabilities[14 remote, 22 local, 2 both]
-
>that makes you think that testing hardware cannot
>be done by people that actually use that hardware
>for the purpose that was intended by it?
Hyperion already was wrong the last time they said
that there are no bugs in Articia. So why should
somebody trust them this time?
Why is this relevant to the question at hand? Do you think that testing cannot be performed by actually using the hardware for the purpose intended?
I also see this said a lot of times "Hyperion already was wrong the last time they said that there are no bugs in Articia. "
Can you or someone else point to a link where Hyperion actually said precisely that?
-
Or are you saying that OpenBSD cannot be broken into regardless of patch level ( not credible ) or are you saying that Linux does not undergo security reviews ( wrong ) or are you saying that no other OS has security built in ( wrong ) or are you saying that OS with ESMs are not as secure ( wrong )?
Please be so kind as not to put words into my mouth, I did not say any of that.
Nah, I think that OpenBSD, fearful of Linux popularity has decided to build up a wee bit of mythology around itself to help it survive.
They do not need any myths, 1 root exploit in 7 years speaks for itself.
It's really quite obvious that a group that concentrates all it's efforts on security is going to be better at it than a group that does not.
-
>Do you think that testing cannot be performed by
>actually using the hardware for the purpose
>intended?
In this case yes. Because those issues happen
randomly under "normal" use but can be
reproduced under very specific conditions.
>Can you or someone else point to a link where
>Hyperion actually said precisely that?
Sure.
"Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion- (134.58.222.78)
on 30-Sep-2002 19:20
For the record, there is no Articia bug."
He then continues with some FUD against bplan
which I won't quote here.
-
@ anarchic_teapot
No, "they" say the most secure OS is one which is kept up to date with all the patches and properly configured.
Well said.
@ Colin Camper
Well there is an openBSD host sitting on the internet for quite some time waiting to be hacked and with prize money attached to it.
Whoop-de-do. My NT4 server has been on the net for coming on three years and hasn't been compromised, because I keep it patched and maintain it well.
-
People, stop advocating random operating systems saying "they're secure" or implying that they're more secure than others. As some here have said already, they're only as secure as well as they are maintained, by their developers and well as their sysadmins.
Some operating systems have had a worse track record when taking in the number of root-level compromises into account.
But, just like when Code Red "sorted the men from the boys" in terms of Windows sysadmins, those with half a brain configured their servers properly, avoiding the obvious potential risk, from those that didn't, who ended up spending a long time cleaning up their systems or reinstalling them.
-
no probs using aone as a server, but you better use some nix* variant like linux or similar...
Though would be kinda expensive server.... i would not waste an aone for that, would rather use some kind of x86.
-
one thing i know for sure, linux is really more secure than a winserver, even though the windows server is up2date with security fixes and such...
-
An AmigaOne would be a crummy choice for a webserver, you can get a doorstop pentium practically free for this purpose as they litter the earth, why spend all that on an exotic piece of Amiga hardware just to run a mundane webserver that any old $0.02 discarded PC can do?
Sure it could do it just fine, but why?
-
> They do not need any myths, 1 root exploit in 7
> years speaks for itself.
"On a default install."
Of course, because everything is DISABLED on a default install. My Windows box is secure too, if I disable networking!
:-P
-
@DaveP
Well.. At least I'm honest with my views and don't attack others anomously on ann.lu. And that's a lot more than can be said among few aroud here.
And seeing your posts and personal attacks, it's quite obvious you are even less neural than I am.. So blame me here.. :-D
-
theres absolutly NO WAY youd catch me using an amigaone or pegasos for a server! NO WAY!!!
for that price, its workstation only!! IMHO
for the same sort of price id rather go for somthing higher end! if it were for business or whatever, consider SUN RS/6000 SGI HP etc...
amigaone is for sitting on your desk, and programming on, and general nerding!
:-)
-
@JoannaK
"And seeing your posts"
Yes I post. Congratulations.
" and personal attacks,"
Oh, now what do you think is a personal attack?
" it's quite obvious you are even less neural than I am.. So blame me here.. "
Neural? Care to sit an IQ test?
I notice you continue to dodge the question, what are your credentials?
"Well.. At least I'm honest with my views"
Im honest with my views too.
" and don't attack others anomously on ann.lu."
I don't either. But then you claim that and there is no way of proving it. I guess we will have to say innocent until proven guilty.
" And that's a lot more than can be said among few aroud here. "
Quite. But can you for once instead of just throwing FUD cogs into threads actually substantiate your points with evidence? That is all I ask of you - alternatively you can answer the question and tell us why we should all give your opinions such credit that they don't require substantiation.
-
zacman wrote:
>Do you think that testing cannot be performed by
>actually using the hardware for the purpose
>intended?
In this case yes. Because those issues happen
randomly under "normal" use but can be
reproduced under very specific conditions.
If they happen randomly under "normal" use then they are detected under normal use. It is the job of a tester to find the specific conditions that can reproduce it 10 times out of 10 and raise the defect.
The problem is initial detection.
So yes, testing can and should be performed using the board under "normal" conditions. Normal being defined as a set of scenarios ( or use cases ) for the given target market.
If an error *only* occurred under specific conditions in a scenario where the board would not normally get used it is still a bug but is it one worth fixing now or patching later if anyone finds it? Thats the job of the delivery team.
>Can you or someone else point to a link where
>Hyperion actually said precisely that?
Sure.
"Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion- (134.58.222.78)
on 30-Sep-2002 19:20
For the record, there is no Articia bug."
He then continues with some FUD against bplan
which I won't quote here.
Thank you for actually doing what was asked, although it would be nice to have the link to that ;-). The only thing I have found that matches the phrase is a repost on a Polish website which I can't translate! ( www.amiga.pl/comments.jsp?nid=1595 )
The other thing I would like to see is some documentation of exactly what the bug is that April fixes and documented proof that it is actually in Articia and is somehow critical to operation?
http://www.pegasos-uk.com/english/support_pegafaq.html
..is the only vaguely useful document on the matter but even that does not contain a lot of meat.
I think it would be ludicrous to claim that any product
is bug free ( but then Ben Hermans is not technical ).
I realise we are straying from the main point here by a long way but it is about time a bit of put up or shut up happened.
Finally there are more than one way to patch around a bug, more than one way to find a bug and more than one way to fix a bug. Remember even the push
on chips we used to have to put on A1200 mobos to allow us to use Zorro II busboards? Or the pin to pin wire connections for the earlier versions?
To claim that somehow the AmigaONE is flawed because it does not have "April" is disingenuous.
-
@DaveP
Just for this once I'll humor you. But would you mind telling me why I'm the only one who has to show credentials here? :-?
I've been around Amiga since early days. Was one of OS1.4 -Beta testers .. Since Commodores demise moved to hw engineering and other patforms. Lately being designing and testing embedded PPC devices at Internet Technologies.. Some publicly displayable reference boards are on company website at www.iti.fi
And you? Yet another Physiotheraupist reborn as a Os-analysists or self learned lawyer ? :-o
-
Just for this once I'll humor you. But would you mind telling me why I'm the only one who has to show credentials here?
Because, as I have already said, you throw assertions into threads without substantiation. Is it so mad as to require "humouring" to ask for some evidence?
I've been around Amiga since early days. Was one of OS1.4 -Beta testers
Now that is very interesting, anywhere you can back this up? I thought I was the only one alive who actually had disk images of 1.4. ;-)
..
Since Commodores demise
Whats this, a paid beta tester for 1.4? Did you actually work FOR C=?
moved to hw engineering and other patforms. Lately being designing and testing embedded PPC devices at Internet Technologies.. Some publicly displayable reference boards are on company website at www.iti.fi
Cool, Ill go check it out. Now how exactly do you TEST those PPC devices?
And you? Yet another Physiotheraupist reborn as a Os-analysists or self learned lawyer ?
Well at least you don't resort to personal insults eh?
No I'm a "Software Engineer" who has worked on such projects as OS/2 2.1, OS/400, DCE, the JTS implementation shipped with WebSphere, JVMs for Itanium ( pre-production working a week at a time at Intel sharing sparse time with other teams ) and PPC etc. Software, software, software.
You can work out the chronology by the release dates I would guess. Recently I have been working on several things at once, none of which I can talk about until release mores the pity. I happen now to have a side business that I own through invested capital selling solutions as well as work under contract.
All of these you will note are pretty large scale development and testing operations. I happen to know from bitter experience that you only have problems at product integration to the extent of having to go back to the drawing board if
a) you are being managed by a bunch of retards at "architecture" stage.
b) you are a retard or engineering collectively has been retarded and did not follow the architectural plans for the system.
So this is why when I picked up your assertion ( fud cog ) that the worst bit of producing OS4.0 was likely to come at the integration level as being unlikely.
This is also why ( JVM use of Itanium being an example ) I happen to know that the second best method of picking out bugs with hardware is to run software on it.
This is why I have questioned your assertions each time and asked for substantiation because it is so much at odds with my own experience.
-
"a) you are being managed by a bunch of retards at "architecture" stage"
which may or may not be the case ;-) But what I meant to add here was that given the syntax and semantics ( the implicit contract ) of the OS exposed to application programmers are well known and well documented ( if nothing but through simulation by running OS3.9 ) that the only big concern would be whether or not Petunia works properly in this context.
-
Hyperion already was wrong the last time they said
that there are no bugs in Articia. So why should
somebody trust them this time?
Please! As if Genesi were innocent with that dubious "No Mai without April" FUD when they KNEW that the problems with the chipset were being corrected.
Psst - Your motives are showing.
-
@JoannaK
www.iti.fi looks like it needs a bit of a web page update! Any customer testimonials for download? I'd like to understand your target market a bit more.
You seem to be a collection of different people probably just doing stuff that you enjoy but that is reading too much into the site ( embedded technoilogy, internet consulting ( education ), web stuff and linux support ) .
Interesting but it doesn't exactly say to me large scale pro development operation.
Don't want to sound offensive here because it is actually quite interesting - but in the context of what is being discussed and claimed by you on these forums in the assertions that I have underlined with a response recently and further back in the past - you will forgive me if I continue to ask you to back up assertions rather than take your opinion as gospel.
Good luck with it, Id like to get onto doing something that I enjoy rather than being a wage slave.
-
@T-bone
An AmigaOne would be a crummy choice for a webserver, you can get a doorstop pentium practically free for this purpose as they litter the earth, why spend all that on an exotic piece of Amiga hardware just to run a mundane webserver that any old $0.02 discarded PC can do?
Well if you wanted to support the platform against the odds I guess ;-) I have to agree with you. The only reason my 43p is sitting there on the T1 is because the OS it runs is probably my favourite and secondly because I have a lot of SCSI devices attached to it.
If I were buying from scratch for it I would probably not buy an old mini or micro ATX PC because of the power problems trying to run so many networking cards and devices micro-ATX presents - it would probably be a second hand netfinity or something for a couple of hundred quid.
I would not personally consider the A1 SE or XE boards as a logical step up from where i am and not a logical first buy for a web server.
So... agreed.
( actually therein is a good reason to consider an ATX based board over a Micro-ATX based board - I wouldn't even be able to get all my network cards into a microATX ).
-
JoannaK wrote:
Well.. It's good to see that there are experienced Hw professionals on making that system too. But I allways thought you at Hyperion were only supposed to do game ports, not to be specialized on designing and testing hardware? :-D
I didn't study game porting at university. Actually, my main focus was logic minimization and operating system design. I wouldn't want to continue porting games for the rest of my life, anyway - making your own games is much more interesting :-D
I also didn't study BIOS making at university.
I consider myself a man that is capable of picking up a book or browsing some web sites and actually learn from that.
I also consider myself capable of recognizing when people actually know what they are talking about, and I most definately get this impression when talking to the techs at MAI. And contrary to most people reading here, I've already seen some AmigaOne boards...
My actual point being, these boards are under continuous testing at MAI's, so saying they are untested is rather unfair.
-
My actual point being, these boards are under continuous testing at MAI's, so saying they are untested is rather unfair.
and the ALI Magic chipset is constantly bieng tested by ALI... does that make it stable?
I want to see the results... unbiased... non zealous... out in the open results... that would be a good thing...
-
zacman wrote:
Hyperion already was wrong the last time they said
that there are no bugs in Articia. So why should
somebody trust them this time?
Actually, I claimed there would be no bug in the Articia's that get delivered. That there was a bug was known. But the consumers never got these chips.
The only difference is that MAI didn't give a fancy name to a bugfix.
-
mips_proc wrote:
and the ALI Magic chipset is constantly bieng tested by ALI... does that make it stable?
I don't get it. First people say that it is untested and hence unsuited as a web server, then you say that testing doesn't mean that it is suited for a web server? Doesn't that sound like FUD to you? Nooooo, of course not... :-D
What is the point? You will find bugs in about any hardware. That doesn't mean that the AmigaOne hardware is unsuited for a web server, as was claimed here. It means that it is equally suited to be a web server as anything else.
Results? What results? The best thing I can tell is that one test was running two web browsers under X with flash anims and some stuff in the background for about a week, without crashes, data loss, or anything else. What other "results" do you want, other than that it didn't crash or destabilize in long-term tests?
I run my kernel builds on my machine, too. I don't do backups any more frequent then on another machine, because it never crashed on my once.
-
Actually, Hans-Jörg customers did get these chips, they were and are on every Betatester and Pegasos delivered to date – some with April and some not (we are replacing those without at no cost to our users). We are all waiting to see what the result of Gerald Carda’s direct efforts with Mai will produce when the next Articias arrive. In the meanwhile, we will continue to use the old Articias with April as long as supplies are still available.
For the record Madgun, we have resolved our differences with Mai, but lets be clear about something: until the “No Mai without April” announcement we never made any public statements about Articia “bugs." Our announcement came as a result of the TerraSoft announcement which was timed in the week JUST BEFORE the launch of the Pegasos. We knew this was a ploy and we took action with facts – which are NOW well documented and known to be accurate.
Finally, this thread is about the Amiga One (or the Pegasos) running as a web server. We hope no one is confusing that with OS4 or MorphOS operating in that capacity. As for MorphOS and without memory protection, we are not targeting that market -- with the Pegasos, yes, but with a different OS. Is there a change now in the marketing plans of the AmigaOne? Just curious…
DaveP and Joanna, it is great you have sorted that out nicely and further “qualified” yourselves. Hopefully, your examples will give those less knowledgable pause before they rant. ;-)
Best regards,
Raquel and Bill :-)
-
Rogue
my point is...no company is going to say 'our stuff is buggy and unstable and unsuitable for your tasks' they have a vested intrest in selling their product...and with good reason.
thats why hardware review sites excist... because everyone 'claims' to be the best... but thats just not the case.
I would like to see a honest review of the A1 (or Pegasos for that matter) doing some common server oriented tasks...
and 'it never crashed on me once' isnt what I call a review :P....
-
>Actually, I claimed there would be no bug in the
>Articia's that get delivered.
Did you already get samples of this new revision and
did test them?
-
Lets all wait and see what happens next...;-)
R&B :-)
-
mips_proc wrote:
and 'it never crashed on me once' isnt what I call a review :P....
I wasn't trying to give one. You wouldn't believe me anyway.
-
zacman wrote:
Did you already get samples of this new revision and
did test them?
Yes. I do have an AmigaOne XE with the latest Articia S revision here (no more fix on the board), with a rather nice selection of CPU modules (currently running the 7451@800Mhz, but I also have a 750FX and some other single and dual G4 modules).
It had been compiling stuff for hours on friday. Mostly the kernel, and one of our linux games, but over and over.
-
@Rogue:
If you have one of these dual G4 spare module...
Remind me please. :-D:-D:-D:-D
-
I wouldn't recomend using a Pegasos or an AmigaONE as a web server if you plan to host anything more serious than a small web site. I wouldn't recomend using a desktop PC as a web server either. If you plan to use a dynamic site with a database behind it, then forget about it. They're just not up to the job. I have personal experience with how badly a desktop PC performs as a webserver, and I'm guessing the Pegasos and the A1 won't fare any better in this regard.
A decent web server should be able to support dual hot-swappable PSUs, hot-swappable PCI and hot-swappable HDs. That way you don't have to stop your server to replace parts that break.
It should also have SCSI RAID to be able to sustain the data transfer required, especially if you have a database. RAID is needed to use disk mirroring on two (or more) drives so that if one hard drive fails, the server will still be running.
Both the Pegasos and the A1 lack these features.
I don't know about the AtriciaS, but in standard desktop PCs the chipsets just can't handle the amount of data transfers that a decent server chipset do. I've seen a dual 600Mhz PIII server kick a 2.0GHz PIV desktop PC's behind in terms of speed when they were both used a webservers.
-
I agree with most of what you say but this:
" If you plan to use a dynamic site with a database behind it, then forget about it. They're just not up to the job."
Au contraire, they are quite up to the job. The issue then is less data transfer ( esp with databases that don't always go to persistent storage to retrieve results :-D ) and more CPU power.
The issue is less maintenance ( backup sites can always be brought online and switched over to take the other offline ) or uninterruptable power supplies. The issue is cost vs value.
If the value you want is low volumes ( >1 million complex dynamic page hits per day ) and you aren't doing business critical applications ( such as a banking site or shopping site where a missed transaction equates to money ) then an ATX based board is quite adequate to the task.
Data mirroring can happen without costly RAID by using an ethernet connection and an exit to drive a mirror transaction against a remote version of the database. Maybe one, two hours of programming!
These days a hell of a lot of overkill is ordered by greedy web hosting techies that don't think hard enough about fitness for purpose and try to scare money out of procurement managers ;-)
Frankly I would rather pick up a second hand netfinity for 500 quid but...
I don't know what Wayne uses but it is a good example of a popular site which could easily be hosted on an ATX.
Something like www.tesco.com should be hosted on special hardware with data and processor redundancy built into the design. But then if you are going to do that use something that has ACID properties to run it on ( like WebSphere, MQSeries and DB2 ).
-
>It had been compiling stuff for hours on friday.
>Mostly the kernel, and one of our linux games, but
>over and over.
Ok, so you have not tested the board/Articia chipset
but you're just using it daily. Thanks for clarification.
-
@Zacman:
Really do you think that is needed to test one revision of a chipset another year?
If this revision has (supposedly) removed a previous bug,you only need to try reproduce it
as in previous versions,then if you cannot reproduce it in,let`s say,one week,this can mean that the bug has dissapeared.
Also if you mean to find possible newer bugs that appears because of the correction done to fix the first bug,this only appears after a stress testing the machine,as,in example,doing things as compiling,etc.
With your meaning of testing,let`s say that nobody can sell a single chip never,because of possible bugs that can appear in daily use.
-
zacman wrote:
Ok, so you have not tested the board/Articia chipset
but you're just using it daily. Thanks for clarification.
No, I just use it. Testing is done at MAI labs, they have the required equipment and expertise. I never did say anything else.
However, I am putting this equipment throught daily use. I have it running with UDMA 100, on an accelerated Radeon X server at 1152x865x24bits, with no problems whatsoever, and I consider this quite a good test.
-
bbrv wrote:
Actually, Hans-Jörg customers did get these chips,
I only had one of those boards. This was replaced with one of the fixed SE boards, and now with an XE board with the new silicon on it. It is my impression that most boards that got delivered where already fixed.
-
@DaveP
I knew state of those pages before posting link here, they definitely need upgrade.
About client's .. well..,Their names (or boards we make for them) are unfortunately not public info. It would be a lot easier for us if they were but it's not something I can make decision on. And frankly, our existing clients means a lot more to me than getting your 'respect' on this board...
About mass production, we don't make them.. After design and testing is done and system reaches volumes, i's no longer much interest to us. We mainly do prototypes, basic Low-level Code like IPL's and drivers for QNX and other releated stuff. Application level is for our clients to make. .
-
JoannaK wrote:
@DaveP
[snip]
About client's .. well..,Their names (or boards we make for them) are unfortunately not public info. It would be a lot easier for us if they were but it's not something I can make decision on.
Don't worry I was just interested in what your target market was. In business it is useful to have testimonials which is a good way of showing people the markets perspective on how products get used.
And frankly, our existing clients means a lot more to me than getting your 'respect' on this board...
Thats good because you wouldn't get my 'respect' over something like that, it was a side question.