From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Jul 15 9: 6:32 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from milf18.bus.net (milf18.bus.net [207.41.25.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C507B37B5C2 for ; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 09:06:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cao@milf18.bus.net) Received: (from cao@localhost) by milf18.bus.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA09173 for freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 12:05:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from cao) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 12:05:40 -0400 From: "Chuck O'Donnell" To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stability of FreeBSD 4.0 STABLE w/SMP Message-ID: <20000715120539.A9146@bus.net> References: <20000715085557.A8629@bus.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Mutt/0.96.3i In-Reply-To: <20000715085557.A8629@bus.net>; from Chuck O'Donnell on Sat, Jul 15, 2000 at 08:55:57AM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Jul 15, 2000 at 08:55:57AM -0400, Chuck O'Donnell wrote: > There were a number of posts recently regarding the the stability of > 4.0-STABLE on SMP boxes. Does anyone know if this has been resolved? I > have three 3.4 production machines that need to be upgraded for other > reasons and I am considering going to the 4.x branch. Two of the > servers are SMP and all run a fair load as web servers. > > Any input would be greatly appreciated. > Many thanks to all the private replies I received. It would seem that 4.x is the way to go. Thanks all, Chuck To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message