From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 21 12:30:05 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC33916A423 for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:30:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [204.156.12.53]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD7643D9B for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:29:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 422E146B0A; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 08:29:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:30:25 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "Nicklas B. Westerlund" In-Reply-To: <42DF9187.3060000@dinpris.no> Message-ID: <20050721132752.E97888@fledge.watson.org> References: <1121917413.4895.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050721113927.T97888@fledge.watson.org> <20050721113737.GB52753@stack.nl> <42DF9187.3060000@dinpris.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Marc Olzheim , Alexey Yakimovich , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quality of FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:30:06 -0000 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