From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 18 20:03:58 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D8A16A41C for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2005 20:03:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists-freebsd@silverwraith.com) Received: from keylime.silverwraith.com (keylime.silverwraith.com [69.55.228.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BB5743D1D for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2005 20:03:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists-freebsd@silverwraith.com) Received: from keylime.silverwraith.com ([69.55.228.10]) by keylime.silverwraith.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1DjjXh-000OWr-UI; Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:03:49 -0700 Received: (from avleen@localhost) by keylime.silverwraith.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id j5IK3jka094251; Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:03:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lists-freebsd@silverwraith.com) X-Authentication-Warning: keylime.silverwraith.com: avleen set sender to lists-freebsd@silverwraith.com using -f Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:03:44 -0700 From: Avleen Vig To: Dimitry Andric Message-ID: <20050618200344.GX11612@silverwraith.com> References: <1116331180.20050618143520@andric.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1116331180.20050618143520@andric.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Kevin Day Subject: Re: Long uptime 5.2.1 server X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 20:03:58 -0000 On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 02:35:20PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: > > We've got a FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p1 server that's been up for 460 > > days now, with pretty heavy use the whole time (70GB+ per day http > > traffic, 140 hits/sec, etc). > > Funny that some people insist on complaining about 5.x instability. :P There were always two things I would recommend waiting for before moving to 5.x: 1. Performance. I remember reading the after 5.0's release, much debugging code was still in the OS and kernel which would reduce performance. 2. Stability. After 5.0 came out, most production environments were advised not to upgrade or put 5.x out, as we know there were probably many obscure bugs still present and trying to be worked out. (2) was put to rest when -STABLE was branched, but I never heard that (1) was dealt with. I assume it was but it would be nice to be sure :-) -- Avleen Vig Systems Administrator Personal: www.silverwraith.com Screams are expressions of pure joy & fulfillment when extracted in the proper manner.