From owner-freebsd-stable Thu May 11 5:41:32 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from morpheus.skynet.be (morpheus.skynet.be [195.238.2.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E38DA37B8F9; Thu, 11 May 2000 05:41:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from blk@skynet.be) Received: from [195.238.1.121] (brad.techos.skynet.be [195.238.1.121]) by morpheus.skynet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCD22DA76; Thu, 11 May 2000 14:41:27 +0200 (MET DST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: blk@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 14:36:20 +0200 To: Kris Kennaway , David Miller From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Server Farms? Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 12:30 PM -0700 2000/5/10, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Perhaps the best thing to do might be to watch the -stable mailing list > for signs that people have been experiencing trouble with a particular > date, and if things are quiet, update to that date on your test machine, > and if it works, do the rest. I was thinking that maybe the best way would be to update one test machine, run that configuration for a week (and do your best to beat the snot out of it ;-), and if it works for you then push it out into production. You wouldn't be quite as up-to-date (your production machines would always be at least a week behind), but you should be much more certain that you won't run into any transient problems that keep the production machines from running. -- These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy ====================================================================== Brad Knowles, || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124 Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels http://www.skynet.be || Belgium To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message