From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 12 09:27:28 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64A1816A4CE for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:27:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.204]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECB2B43D49 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:27:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kometen@gmail.com) Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id c16so1748290rne for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 02:27:27 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=tXWu6YHhqz5CaVJtT9DJCTBOCrLPsHVv+Bh3tp+5O1aWt6Wps68RNfhx9j6v+eHvYyxazeg+SyT+9sUwxkyIDoLDPrCBnNmNuhYBd8LO/Twp2MDDIyCfk0f4ZGnxRZ9sV3AXNRCN0BspcPJLzxl+vKFdYiNb724shXyExXipbqU= Received: by 10.38.207.30 with SMTP id e30mr3044666rng; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 02:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.149.53 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 02:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:27:27 +0200 From: Claus Guttesen To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20050411204906.GA26872@bloom.cse.buffalo.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <20050411204906.GA26872@bloom.cse.buffalo.edu> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.4-RC2 Available X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Claus Guttesen List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:27:28 -0000 > We encourage people to help with testing so any final bugs can be identified > and worked out. At this point the only major problem has been reports > of large server (4 processors or more) hanging under extreme load conditions > (varied load of local processes like database and heavy network load). > Details to help with debugging have been hard to obtain so if anyone is > in a position to help with trying to reproduce this it would be appreciated. 5.4 RC1 is running on our webservers, a combo of dual Xeon's, Noconas and Opterons without any problems. It's also running on our firewall with pf and the performance is quite nice, less than 10 % utilization. I have a NFS-server running 5.3 beta 3 which is accessed by the webservers. The volume is lightly accessed. Next week it will host a new volume which will have a lot of activity, so I'd like to upgrade it to 5.4 RC2 before that (saturday). Looking at the only major problems left, I feel pretty comfortable that RC2 will be very stable. The NFS-server is a Compaq dual PIII at 1 GHz (G2), 3 GB RAM, Smart RAID 5 (ciss), qlogic 2310 hba and an Intel GBIC-card (em). The em-driver is mpsafe and the isp-driver is not, but overall the performance should be better with 5.4 compared to 5.3. Has anyone had the opportunity to compare NFS on 5.3 and 5.4? Should I play it safe and wait until May before I upgrade? regards Claus