From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org  Wed Feb 20 22:32:05 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 0996D14DEDE4
 for <freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:32:05 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from jonathan@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)
 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256)
 (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org",
 Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B0E871F36;
 Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:32:04 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from jonathan@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from [192.168.86.191]
 (stjhnf0157w-142-134-222-130.dhcp-dynamic.fibreop.nl.bellaliant.net
 [142.134.222.130])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 (Authenticated sender: jonathan)
 by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 073D048FA;
 Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:32:03 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from jonathan@FreeBSD.org)
From: "Jonathan Anderson" <jonathan@FreeBSD.org>
To: "Alex Dupre" <ale@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: "Colin Percival" <cperciva@freebsd.org>,
 "Matthew Seaman" <matthew@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Amazon AMIs
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 19:02:01 -0330
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.4r5594)
Message-ID: <E396A0C7-F939-48A1-9B57-D643806B303B@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <53a0bd68-a6ba-e8ad-4af2-abeb22e92c03@FreeBSD.org>
References: <f002c020-1e63-c12f-456e-e20f8546a701@FreeBSD.org>
 <8a139c9c-b98b-4a54-1d7c-0ea1e3dc7a72@freebsd.org>
 <53a0bd68-a6ba-e8ad-4af2-abeb22e92c03@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 6B0E871F36
X-Spamd-Bar: --
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.98 / 15.00];
 local_wl_from(0.00)[FreeBSD.org];
 NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.996,0];
 NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.99)[-0.985,0];
 ASN(0.00)[asn:11403, ipnet:96.47.64.0/20, country:US];
 NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.999,0]
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 22:32:05 -0000

On 20 Feb 2019, at 18:50, Alex Dupre wrote:

> Colin Percival wrote:
>> Last time I looked at this, we weren't handling hotplug/hotunplug of 
>> "NVMe"
>> disks properly on the m5/c5/etc. instances.  I opted to recommend the 
>> instance
>> which completely works rather than the one with slightly better 
>> performance...
>
> 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=235856
>
> They are indeed cheaper and more performant, but not 100% reliable in
> every workload.

https://www.xkcd.com/937 ?

:)


Jon
-- 
Jonathan Anderson
jonathan@FreeBSD.org