| From: | Mitch Pirtle <mitch(dot)pirtle(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexey Borzov <borz_off(at)cs(dot)msu(dot)su> |
| Cc: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Inadequate hosting for www.postgresql.org |
| Date: | 2004-11-03 16:57:57 |
| Message-ID: | 330532b604110308573e485b9b@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:35:56 +0300, Alexey Borzov <borz_off(at)cs(dot)msu(dot)su> wrote:
> Your suggestion is nice and all, but right now we are discussing the fact that
> we don't even have *one* dedicated server. Only a shared account on substandard
> hardware, incapable of running PHP scripts. :(
And several people have offered over the last few months, including
myself. I am thinking about a dual xeon with 1 GB RAM that has a load
average of 0.01... Nightly backups too, with disk a non-factor. I
asked about bandwidth usage estimates but never got that far :-(
This I simply do not understand. If there is a need for dedicated
hardware, and it is being offered, then why is it not being accepted?
Didn't CommandPrompt also offer dedicated hardware?
Not wanting to start another heated debate, just wanting to understand
what the deal is - as this topic keeps getting regurgitated without a
conclusion.
-- Mitch
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2004-11-03 17:17:51 | Re: Inadequate hosting for www.postgresql.org |
| Previous Message | Alexey Borzov | 2004-11-03 14:52:28 | Re: Inadequate hosting for www.postgresql.org |