From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 5 00:01:37 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE2B10656ED for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 00:01:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from edwin@mavetju.org) Received: from mail5out.barnet.com.au (mail5.barnet.com.au [202.83.178.78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4E338FC24 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 00:01:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from edwin@mavetju.org) Received: by mail5out.barnet.com.au (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E61982218BE7; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:45:33 +1000 (EST) X-Viruscan-Id: <4847291D000062AA48B6FA@BarNet> Received: from mail5auth.barnet.com.au (mail5.barnet.com.au [202.83.178.78]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail5auth.barnet.com.au", Issuer "*.barnet.com.au" (verified OK)) by mail5.barnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6689021B35DE; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:45:33 +1000 (EST) Received: from k7.mavetju (k7.mavetju.org [10.251.1.18]) by mail5auth.barnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA49A2218BB9; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:45:32 +1000 (EST) Received: by k7.mavetju (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 69DEA15C; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:45:32 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:45:32 +1000 From: Edwin Groothuis To: Doug Barton , Jo Rhett , FreeBSD Stable Message-ID: <20080604234532.GA89656@k7.mavetju> Mail-Followup-To: Edwin Groothuis , Doug Barton , Jo Rhett , FreeBSD Stable References: <9B7FE91B-9C2E-4732-866C-930AC6022A40@netconsonance.com> <4846D849.2090005@FreeBSD.org> <20080604204325.GD4701@lava.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080604204325.GD4701@lava.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 00:01:37 -0000 On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 10:43:27AM -1000, Clifton Royston wrote: > On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > > Jo Rhett wrote: > ... > > >But given that 6.3 is still experiencing bugs with things that > > >are working fine and stable in 6.2, this is a pretty hard case to make. > > > > I admit to not having been following 6.x too closely, but are these > > things that have been reported, or problems you're having personally? > > Speaking just for myself, I'd love to get a general response from > people who have run servers on both as to whether 6.3 is on average > more stable than 6.2. I really haven't gotten any clear impression as > to this, either from posts on -hackers or -stable, and I believe I > asked a couple times. I've seen comments that 6.3 should be > considerably more stable than 6.2, but also complaints about bugs such > as Jo is commenting on, and I have not seen much committed in the way > of errata fixes for 6.3 since its release. We have about 40 servers which were running 6.1 and 6.2 and the seven busy ones (application servers which do mail and proxying, and the database servers) hung *dead* every week. One per day. Luckely they were all redundant etc and remotely rebootable, but it was a nightmare for half a year. A handfull of patches (mutex-based) helped a lot, but still it was too much for my liking. The upgrade to 6.3 fixed *everything*, these seven servers now have uptimes of (since february) again. (The updates were scheduled in November as xmas-break updates, so imagine me getting more and more nervous when things got dragged out). So 6.3 saved my sanity :-) Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org edwin@mavetju.org | Weblog: http://www.mavetju.org/weblog/