Re: [ciapug] Hmmm...

[Jerry Weida <jweida@xxxxxxxxx>]

You know... it used to be that if you had an uptime of more than 30
days it was considered poor administration because kernel patches would
come out at least that often.

That said, I've seen some posts in newsgroups about servers being up 3
years before being rebooted or just crashing.  I've only seen
about 6 months before I rebooted (usually for a kenerl update)

On 6/23/05, Chris Hettinger <cjh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I win. :)

(development server)
[chris@xxx]$ uptime
  10:01:32 up 369 days, 10:09,  1 user,  load average: 0.07, 0.05, 0.00

(production server)
[chris@xxx]$ uptime
  10:01:34 up 369 days, 10:27,  1 user,  load average: 0.05, 0.02, 0.00



Dave J. Hala Jr. wrote:
> Time for some fun...
>
> Here's one of my Linux database servers. Looks like things have been
> kinda slow lately.  Uptime was double that before I had to replace a dvd
> rw that died from sucking up a bunch of dust...
>
> [root@xxx]# uptime
>  08:25:25  up 256 days, 23:06,  2 users,  load average: 0.12, 0.20, 0.09
>
>
> :) Dave

_______________________________________________
ciapug mailing list
ciapug@xxxxxxxxxx
http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/ciapug

_______________________________________________
ciapug mailing list
ciapug@xxxxxxxxxx
http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/ciapug