Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:30:25 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: "Nicklas B. Westerlund" <nicklas@dinpris.no> Cc: Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl>, Alexey Yakimovich <aiy@ferens.net>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quality of FreeBSD Message-ID: <20050721132752.E97888@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <42DF9187.3060000@dinpris.no> References: <1121917413.4895.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050721113927.T97888@fledge.watson.org> <20050721113737.GB52753@stack.nl> <42DF9187.3060000@dinpris.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Nicklas B. Westerlund wrote: > Although I havn't seen any major problems on our servers, all using u320 > scsi and smp - I don't feel as secure about my choice of upgrading to > 5.x. We still have some 4.x servers in production, and judging by how > this is evolving, I think I'll rather skip the 5-branch for those > machines and keep testing 6.x. The last thing we need is servers with > problems to disturb our sleep at night. > > Overall I think we're a few of the lucky ones, as alot of people seem to > have huge problems which we havn't encountered, again that is because of > different architectures and such. Actually, I think you're part of the silent majority who find it works fine in their environment. We use RELENG_5 at work on a number of machines, and I work with several companies and organizations who do, and have no problems at all. The edge cases seem to be: - High load environments, or high load testing. - Hardware that isn't part of the regular testing that FreeBSD developers do as part of their work, likely because they don't have the hardware. - Less commonly deployed features -- i.e., IPX, which has experienced serious functional problems in RELENG_5 until a few months ago. Interestingly, resulting from a compiler change, not network stack changes... Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050721132752.E97888>