Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 15:29:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu> To: kalts@estpak.ee Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: raidframe Message-ID: <200306021929.h52JTWmk096627@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20030602050917.GB2247@kevad.internal> References: <3ED9E8AB.5060106@he.iki.fi> <20030601232426.A43338@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <00b501c32876$74502fd0$812a40c1@PETEX31> <3EDA600C.90104@btc.adaptec.com> <039101c328e2$09bce480$812a40c1@PETEX31> <20030602050917.GB2247@kevad.internal>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Mon, 2 Jun 2003 08:09:17 +0300, Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee> said: > FreeBSD 5.x series is slowly progressing, but is nowhere near to > production quality. As the things are currently, you simply waste > your time. I'm running an old 5.1-current and a more recent 5.1-beta of about a week ago in production as news servers and am reasonably pleased with the results. Other than the cvsup mirror I don't have any more intensive test workload than that. The 5.1-beta installation replaced a W2K Advanced Server running NNTPRelay, and so far it's stayed up three whole days, which is a hell of a lot longer than W2K ever did. 5.x is getting there. It has been stable enough for desktop use for a long time, and now the rest of the system is catching up. -GAWollman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200306021929.h52JTWmk096627>