From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 16 18:42:02 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 5D07316A41F for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 18:42:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kline@tao.thought.org) Received: from tao.thought.org (dsl231-043-140.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net [216.231.43.140]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E6443D78 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 18:41:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kline@tao.thought.org) Received: from tao.thought.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tao.thought.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBGIfoYv058557 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:41:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kline@tao.thought.org) Received: (from kline@localhost) by tao.thought.org (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id jBGIfoEn058556 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:41:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kline) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:41:49 -0800 From: Gary Kline To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20051216184149.GC58262@thought.org> References: <20051216105005.68898.qmail@web36212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20051216113117.GA52639@mail.scottro.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051216113117.GA52639@mail.scottro.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986. X-Of_Interest: Observing 19 years of service to the Unix community Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006 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: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 18:42:02 -0000 On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 06:31:17AM -0500, Scott Robbins wrote: > > A "me too" here for 5-Stable. > > > > I have a test PC, that was running 5-Stable using an > > additional swapfile to extend swap space. Never any > > problems at all with 5. > > > > After upgrading to 6-stable, I got regular hang-ups of > > the system (endless loop?) when swapspace is used > > extensively. Never happened with 5. I didn't move until 5 until 5.2+; it was a major move. There were lots of things to get-right. So maybe by 6.5, 6 will be granite stable. I've been using FBSD since 2.0.5, and while lots of solid features have been thoughtfully added, I just don't see that 6 buys that much more than 5.x. Maybe 7.x, tho... gary > > I have to add my vote for 6, as did someone else in an earlier post. > Like some others, I always found 5.x a bit slower than 4.x (No > benchmarks, completely subjective.) From the very beginning, I've found > 6.x to be stable and quickly moved some non-critical servers to it. > > After testing, we moved the more critical servers to it as well, and > have been quite happy withe results. > > Again, completely subjective, but from the beginning 6.x seemed faster > and more responsive than 5.x > Hmm. A series of benchmarks might prove some points. Back in Aug, 2001 I ran stress tests and other benchmarks to test *this* hardware. I pushed things to a loadave of > 70. Everything held. Maybe we should consider something like this. A series of hard stress tests as well as objective benchmarks as we go forward. It would give one some metrics... . gary -- Gary Kline kline@thought.org www.thought.org Public service Unix