[ldr@veritech.com: Re: Linux Commercial Milestone - 1 million processes. (fwd)]

[rodney at sabletech.com (Rodney Thayer)]

paint those numbers on the golden arches above your CPU's...


 >X-POP3-Rcpt: rodney at wizard
>Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 12:41:11 -0500
>From: Bruce Dawson <jbd at virgin.mv.com>
>To: gnhlug at zk3.dec.com
>Subject: [ldr at veritech.com: Re: Linux Commercial Milestone - 1 million
processes. (fwd)]
>Comments: Hyperbole mail buttons accepted, v3.15.
>Sender: owner-gnhlug at zk3.dec.com
>Reply-To: Bruce Dawson <jbd at virgin.mv.com>
>
>X-Sender: ldr at vt.veritech.com
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 11:40:23 +0000
>To: "I-Weigh News Interest Group" <ldr at veritech.com>
>From: "Lee D. Rothstein" <ldr at veritech.com>
>Subject: Re: Linux Commercial Milestone - 1 million processes. (fwd)
>
>At 10:34 AM 12/14/95 +0001, Barry Bass wrote:
>
>>Here's a posting that was forwarded to me that I 
>>thought you might be interested in. What it does is show the beginning of 
>>the "shift in the paradigm" away from MS.
>
>Don't agree about the shift.  The shift, if anything, is away from
>commercial Unix.  But ... this is a VERY interesting post.
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 01:40:46 -0500 (EST)
>>From: Chris Fearnley <cjf at netaxs.com>
>>To: shemuail at netaxs.com, cjf at netaxs.com, lenp at nothinbut.net,
>>    bbass at world.std.com, jmonty at netaxs.com, kallal at omni.voicenet.com,
>>    dystan at netaxs.com, linux at wells.com, Steve O'Neill <soneill at netaxs.com>
>>Subject: Linux Commercial Milestone - 1 million processes. (fwd)
>
>>>From: greg at wind.rmcc.com (G.W. Wettstein)
>>>Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
>>>Subject: Linux Commercial Milestone - 1 million processes.
>>>Date: 5 Dec 1995 18:56:25 GMT
>>>Organization: Roger Maris Cancer Center
>
>>>I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank Linus and the whole
>>>cohort of Linux developers for what I consider to be a fairly outstanding
>>>achievement.
>>>
>>>As some of you may know our Cancer Center is run completely by a
>>>network of Linux workstations.  These platforms serve as the basis for
>>>Perceptions-OIS which is our clinical information support environment.
>>>Perceptions and the proper care of our cancer patients would not be
>>>what it is today without Linux.
>>>
>>>This morning the workstation servicing the pharmacy rolled over the 1
>>>million process mark.  Here is the current uname and uptime outputs:
>>>
>>>Linux snirt 1.2.13 #4-K Tue Sep 5 12:56:58 CDT 1995 i386
>>>
>>> 12:17pm  up 78 days,  5:35,  6 users,  load average: 0.02, 0.17, 0.15
>Proc: 1005618
>>>
>>>The important field to notice in the uptime line is the Proc: field.
>>>This is a count of the total number of processes created/run by the
>>>kernel since the machine was booted.  This workstation rolled over the
>>>1 million mark about 10:00am this morning.
>>>
>>>Our local patch file modifies all of our kernels to include a counter
>>>which is incremented on each successful fork.  We modified the kmem-ps
>>>utilities to report this value.  We thus have a means of determining
>>>the total number of processes run by the kernel.  We find this useful
>>>as an index to determine load variations on a day-to-day basis for our
>>>network workstations.
>>>
>>>The machine in question is an 80386-dx33 (Gateway-2k) with 16Mbyte of
>>>memory and runs X about 12-14 hours a day.  This machine is
>>>responsible for running the software which coordinates and manages all
>>>the chemotherapuetic and infusional drug therapies administered at our
>>>Cancer Center.  The total process and uptime count would be
>>>approaching the 2 million/170 day mark except for the unfortunate
>>>problem of bad batteries in a UPS... :-)
>>>
>>>Everyone can of course debate the usefullness of uptime results.  My
>>>intention is not to initiate a thread which is better left to those
>>>individuals who have time for the the advocacy groups.  My real
>>>intention is to publically acknowledge and thank the efforts of
>>>everyone who has made this operating environment what it is today.
>>>
>>>People who know me will tell you that I am neither an OS or language
>>>bigot.  I tend to use the tool that fits a job the best.  We stumbled
>>>onto Linux and began using it because it made a development/operations
>>>platform available which made the Perceptions-OIS project possible.
>>>Since Perceptions is based upon a peer-to-peer, multi-host concurrent
>>>processing model a unix-like platform was really the only solution to
>>>our problem.
>>>
>>>The important point of this note is that I think we need to all
>>>acknowledge the tremendous toolset that has been made available by all
>>>those individuals dedicated to the notion of freely distributable
>>>software.  It includes not only Linus and the Linux gang, but those
>>>individuals committed to the other free unices, developers such as
>>>Larry Wall and John Ousterhout who have graced us with high-level
>>>scripting tools such as PERL and TCL/TK and certainly last but not
>>>least the Free Software Foundation.
>>>
>>>I have been around computers since the early to mid-1970's.  This
>>>experience has taught me to be staggered by the arsenal of tools that
>>>are now available through the free distribution channels.  There has
>>>probably never been a time in history when the price of entry for the
>>>development of sophisticated applications has been so low.
>>>
>>>People have told me on many occassions that I am absolutely nuts to
>>>put the health and safety of our cancer patients into the hands of an
>>>'unproven' operating system and software environment.  This is a point
>>>that could be very seriously debated.  It would seem that experience
>>>is currently indicating that we have made the correct decision.
>>>
>>>Our patients who suffer from dreadful cancer related and hematologic
>>>diseases deserve every opportunity they can be given.  The tools that
>>>we have been able to deploy from free software channels have enabled
>>>us to write and develop innovative applications which, to my
>>>knowledge, do not exist through commercial avenues.  To not avail
>>>ourselves of the flexibility and power of this environment would be to
>>>ultimately deprive our patients of access to both efficiencies and
>>>quality care improvements that our software has given to us.  Taking
>>>that thought to bed each evening lets me sleep quite comfortably.
>
>>>Thanks go from our patients, my staff and myself personally to Linus,
>>>the Linux Activists and all free software developers and enthusiasts.
>>>Thanks for providing an environment which has supported a million
>>>attempts in the last 78 days of making life better for all of us.
>
>>>Dr. G.W. Wettstein           Oncology Research Div. Computing Facility
>>>Roger Maris Cancer Center    INTERNET: greg at wind.rmcc.com
>>>820 4th St. N.
>>>Fargo, ND  58122
>>>Phone: 701-234-7556
> 
>>Christopher J. Fearnley            |    UNIX SIG Leader at PACS
>>cjf at netaxs.com (finger me!)        |    (Philadelphia Area Computer Society)
>>cfearnl at pacs.pha.pa.us             |    Design Science Revolutionary
>>http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf         |    Explorer in Universe
>>"Dare to be Naive" -- Bucky Fuller |    Linux Advocate
><> Lee D. Rothstein | ldr at veritech.com | +603-424-2900 | Fax: 424-8549 <>
>    <> VeriTech | 7 Merrymeeting Drive | Merrimack, NH  03054-2934 <>
>
>**********************************************************
>To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to majordomo with
>the following text:
>unsubscribe gnhlug
>**********************************************************
>
>

                  Rodney Thayer           ::         rodney at sabletech.com
                  Sable Technology Corp   ::              +1 617 332 7292
                  246 Walnut St           ::         Fax: +1 617 332 7970     
                  Newton MA 02160 USA     ::  http://www.shore.net/~sable
                           "Developers of communications software"