From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org  Wed Feb 20 22:27:13 2019
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 899DD14DEACA
 for <freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:27:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ale@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from lab.alexdupre.com (lab.alexdupre.com [93.151.207.39])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A83B071B77
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:27:12 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from ale@FreeBSD.org)
Received: (qmail 21612 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2019 22:20:28 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.178.163?)
 (sysadmin@alexdupre.com@192.168.178.163)
 by lab.alexdupre.com with ESMTPSA; 20 Feb 2019 22:20:28 -0000
Subject: Re: Amazon AMIs
To: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org>,
 Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
References: <f002c020-1e63-c12f-456e-e20f8546a701@FreeBSD.org>
 <8a139c9c-b98b-4a54-1d7c-0ea1e3dc7a72@freebsd.org>
From: Alex Dupre <ale@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <53a0bd68-a6ba-e8ad-4af2-abeb22e92c03@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:20:28 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8a139c9c-b98b-4a54-1d7c-0ea1e3dc7a72@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: A83B071B77
X-Spamd-Bar: --
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.99 / 15.00];
 local_wl_from(0.00)[FreeBSD.org];
 NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0];
 NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0];
 NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.99)[-0.994,0];
 ASN(0.00)[asn:30722, ipnet:93.151.128.0/17, country:IT]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:27:13 -0000

Colin Percival wrote:
> On 2/20/19 3:00 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>> Question:=C2=A0 Why is m4.large the recommended instance type?=C2=A0 S=
urely we'd be
>> better served and present users with a better experience by recommendi=
ng an m5
>> instance as one of the more modern and higher performance types?
>=20
> Last time I looked at this, we weren't handling hotplug/hotunplug of "N=
VMe"
> disks properly on the m5/c5/etc. instances.  I opted to recommend the i=
nstance
> which completely works rather than the one with slightly better perform=
ance...

It does happen only on a few instances, but I get some freezes on new t3
machines: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D235856

They are indeed cheaper and more performant, but not 100% reliable in
every workload.

--=20
Alex Dupre