Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 16:07:27 -0500 From: Travis Whitton <whitton@atlantic.net> To: DougB@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrade strategy for production server Message-ID: <20040314210727.GA4938@grub.ath.cx>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Ports shouldn't fail at all for a year or more. You didn't mention what > kind of hardware this is. If it's a single processor system, 4.9 is > probably going to give you the best performance in that one year time > frame. If it's an SMP system, in the next 6 months or so 5.x will be a > significant benefit. It's a single proc system. A year seems long enough to merit sticking with 4.9. It seems that major releases can often stretch to over a year, so that should give me a while to stay on the 5.x tree once I decide it's safe to switch. > That said, I'd like to suggest an alternative proposal. If this system > is so crucial to your operation, it ought to have some redundancy, > right? :) Why not do a head to head test with 4.9 and 5.x-current on > the same hardware? That way you solve several problems at the same time. > You'll be able to determine conclusively if 5.x works for you, you'll > have a hot spare system ready to go in case of a hardware failure, and > you won't have any downtime at all during upgrade cycles. Not a bad idea at all. We do regular backups of course, but it's always nice to have a drop-in replacement. Thanks very much for your input. I look forward to being a member of the outstanding FreeBSD community. FYI, the server will be acting as a repository and access point to many years of historical(and current) environmental data, so you can add that to the list of tasks that FreeBSD performs. Thanks for your help, Travis Whitton
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040314210727.GA4938>