From owner-freebsd-bugs  Sun Dec  3 16:30:10 1995
Return-Path: owner-bugs
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id QAA08851
          for bugs-outgoing; Sun, 3 Dec 1995 16:30:10 -0800
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA08758
          for <bugs@freebsd.org>; Sun, 3 Dec 1995 16:29:58 -0800
Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin [198.145.90.50]) by Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA03853; Sun, 3 Dec 1995 16:29:55 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA02498; Sun, 3 Dec 1995 16:23:23 -0800
Message-Id: <199512040023.QAA02498@corbin.Root.COM>
To: uhclem%nemesius@fw.ast.com (Frank Durda IV)
cc: bugs@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible-style crashes on 2.1.0 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 03 Dec 95 17:33:00 +0700."
             <m0tMNus-000CccC@nemesis.lonestar.org> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 1995 16:23:23 -0800
Sender: owner-bugs@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>[0]However, in the seven days since upgrading to 2.1.0, the same hardware
>[0]has experienced an average of 10 unexpected reboots, or just over
>[0]one a day.  The systems with more load (news vs no news) crash more often.
>
>[1]   A couple of observations... If you've had "only" 10 unexpected reboots
>[1]across 6 machines and that it happens  more often on heavy-load machines,
>[1]does this suggest that some of the machines aren't crashing at all?
>
>Uh, 10 crashes per machine, so 60 crashes (average) in one week.  As
>of today, the number of crashes is approaching the 80s.   
>
>
>[1]   Do you use a screensaver on your machines?
>
>No.   To save the screens, we use this thing called "a monitor power switch".
>
>
>These are *very* stock systems where the operating system is concerned.
>Kernels have been recompiled to eliminate drivers not in use, but that is
>it.  Again, X is not in use.   C-news, inn, smail and a few other odds and
>ends are the applications that are present.  Some have network boards
>and drivers loaded, but are not connected to an active network.

   So you're saying above that the machines do all of the email and news via
UUCP? Are you using the MMAP option with INN? What kind of systems are these
(I mean CPU and motherboard)? Are they all the same?

-DG