Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 22:53:32 +1000 From: Andrew Reilly <andrew-freebsd@areilly.bpc-users.org> To: Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 Message-ID: <20080607125332.GA8784@duncan.reilly.home> In-Reply-To: <702FA4B9-8CEE-4C9D-86A8-157CA1E69BD7@khera.org> References: <9B7FE91B-9C2E-4732-866C-930AC6022A40@netconsonance.com> <4846D849.2090005@FreeBSD.org> <20080604204325.GD4701@lava.net> <702FA4B9-8CEE-4C9D-86A8-157CA1E69BD7@khera.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 12:08:54PM -0400, Vivek Khera wrote: > > On Jun 4, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Clifton Royston wrote: > > > Speaking just for myself, I'd love to get a general response from > >people who have run servers on both as to whether 6.3 is on average > >more stable than 6.2. I really haven't gotten any clear impression as > > I'll throw in my "+1" for running 6.3. I have it on many boxes, some > of which run gmirror and some of which have bge devices (some with > both). Never any problems. They operate things varying from Postgres > servers to DNS servers to mail servers (postfix) under pretty > consistent load pushing lots and lots of data both network and to disk. I'll second your "+1" for 6.3 and raise you a 7.0. My main server is a 1U Dell box with bge network interfaces and it's as happy as a clam under 7.0 (infrequently updated _STABLE, actually). All of my more single-use boxes are happy 7_STABLE campers, too. Most of 'em are close to 0 load average, but they're important, continuously used by their smallish user base, and stay up. Cheers, Andrew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080607125332.GA8784>