[Xitami] :: denial of service ::

[Thomas J. Hruska]

At 01:31 PM 10/25/2004 -0600, admin writeth:
>XP has the same problem on memory releases as 9X does and so does Win 2000.

I've never had a problem on any of those OSes you mentioned and I run
month-long processes that _intentionally_ chew 100% CPU and 500MB+ RAM.
So, the behavior you are seeing is some program or system driver with a
memory leak, not Windows and could be Xitami for all anyone knows
(ProtoNova is guaranteed to be memory leak-free at the application level).
When Windows starts swapping out memory, Task Manager won't reflect the
true numbers, but I can guarantee you that your so-called leaks have
nothing to do with Windows itself given the rigorous tests I've put it
through and my general system uptime (months on end with downtime only to
reboot after applying security updates).


>You will see after running XP for a longer period of time that the OS may 
>be using 250 Mb memory on a large machine.
>Also, it will NOT help to add more RAM as the memory specifications are 
>more or less false as provided from M$

RAM isn't a problem.  CPU availability is the problem.  Hyperthreaded CPUs
will generally perform better in server environments than single-CPUs and
true dual-procs will do slightly better than hyperthreaded.


>Will be fun to see how they resolve this in Longhorn which will require 100 
>GB hdd and 1 Gb ram to even run, plus all other hardware has to be 
>digitally signed for it to run. At least as they specified it for the 4074 
>release.

Digital signatures are only going to be checked once...during boot.  And
the drivers are signed, not the hardware.  And the numbers most people
heard were pulled out of thin air to just to sound impressive more than
anything else (a marketing ploy you and most other people fell for).  MSDN
Subscribers will get more realistic numbers when the real beta comes out
mid-2005 for those with at least MSDN Enterprise subscriptions.  Just to
nitpick.


>I run Xitami on Win 2 K and serve about 800-1000 Mb per day at well over 
>10-20 000 hits and it seems stable.

It seems to be, until people start serving up dynamic content or use the
built-in FTP server.  I personally never had a problem with static content.
 Of course, that doesn't say much.  I never had a problem with Apache with
static content either.


>The only trouble was resetting the server to get it to refresh the cfg 
>files. But that's resolved by a simple & free remote VNC controller from my 
>desktop.

ProtoNova detects configuration changes and dynamically adapts to the
scenario.  No need for VNC or Remote Desktop let alone restarting the server.


Thomas J. Hruska
shinelight@shininglightpro.com

Shining Light Productions
Home of the Nuclear Vision scripting language and ProtoNova web server.
http://www.slproweb.com/