From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 6 15:01:51 2005 Return-Path: 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 1B38116A4CE for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 15:01:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.203]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B03643D46 for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 15:01:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chrcoluk@gmail.com) Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id f1so621824rne for ; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 07:01:49 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=BfuJ394+5TBTrWgZCA3Ol5E2A0HuT7fqohc0CFj2xnTG2MhnRWNLixSxGcjlcVUvjFiZHNXFnH9jbCb+bxWbEN0Q8IayRTdgQ2I/NB6MZvjaon9j4kn6ob+AY62Xk/PbVSAdD2Yu488qSLcLVMzy17NWSFTvY7fjUhK+nFc6A+o= Received: by 10.38.152.6 with SMTP id z6mr181888rnd; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 07:01:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.39.1.22 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 07:01:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3aaaa3a05020607013bff630e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 15:01:49 +0000 From: Chris To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: 5.x concerns X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Chris List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:01:51 -0000 Hi I switched over half a dozen or so servers to 5.x since october last year expecting the same stability and performance I have had from freebsd 4.x, after running it for 2 or 3 months I have ran into some problems/concerns, listed below. This is not intended for anything other then feedback and andswers to my questions I am well aware of the hard work put into freebsd and will continue to love the os. 1 - Speed, performance, All but 2 of the servers are normal Single processor machines and I think mainstream is still single processor, whilst there are smp machines and 64bit machines cropping up they are still a minority, what I have noticed first hand and read on the web is that 5.3 is sluggish behind 4.10 on single cpu machines, whilst on 64bit and smp machines it whizzes along. Was it a wise decision to only concentrate on smp performance as what seems to be the case and is there going to be single processor improvements to come? 2 - stability, about 75% of my servers are fully stable on freebsd 5.3, on 4.x I have had no stability issues. We have 1 server just continously locking up, another one that has tcp stack problems (its to do with the network side of things as locally it responds but goes offline), and has to be rebooted every few weeks. 3 - robustness, 5.3 seems to not handle ddos attacks so well, I remember on a 4.x machine I could easily take a full 100mbit udp flood and have the server respond albeit maybe with some lag but it stayed functional, 5.x seems to crumble under a lot less pressure on the same machine. This could be with pf been loaded on top of ipfw adding extra overhead I dont know. 4 - compatiblity, I remember using 5.2.1 and pretty much all software worked well in that and then they did the bind defaulting to base and libs version jump, why wasnt this done in 5.0 so 3rd party apps could adjust, now we have a situation where most stuff that worked in 4.x worked well in 5.1 and 5.2.1 but then broke in 5.3 so effectively 5.3 was liek a new major version over 5.2.1. I doubt I will be rolling back my server's as I know things will get better over time but new server's we build I will expect to be deploying 4.10 on them. I just feel with the ULE scheduler stuff and the IO performance issues I have heard about along with the issues I have come across that 5.3 got rushed towards the end, and instead of keeping 5.x as CURRENT they wanted 5.3 to be a production release so disabled some things such as the ULE scheduler to force it to be stable and its turned out a bit messy. Has anyone else got comments on my 4 main points? Chris