From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 16 03:31:37 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 BD4F616A41F for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 03:31:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49B4B43D46 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 03:31:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1EQzEC-0005T5-Fh for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 05:30:28 +0200 Received: from murdoc.gwi.net ([207.5.142.8]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 05:30:28 +0200 Received: from jcoombs by murdoc.gwi.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 05:30:28 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org From: "Joshua Coombs" Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 23:03:53 -0400 Lines: 41 Message-ID: References: <200510152346.RAA20742@lariat.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: murdoc.gwi.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Sender: news Subject: Re: 6.0 release date and stability 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: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 03:31:37 -0000 "Brett Glass" wrote in message news:200510152346.RAA20742@lariat.net... > The release schedule for FreeBSD 6.0, on the FreeBSD Web site, > doesn't show a > projected date for the finished product. How close is it? We are > (believe it > or not) still running and building production servers with 4.11, and > would > love to move to 6.0 (at least for uniprocessor systems; we may wait > for 6.1 > for SMP) if it is sufficiently stable and performs adequately. > > We're running our own tests on RC1, but don't have a lot of spare > servers to > try it on. So, it's worth asking: How stable is RC1 turning out to > be on > uniprocessor platforms? On SMP platforms? How is network and disk > performance > relative to 4.11? (When we tested 5.x, both network and file system > performance were worse than that of 4.11.) With what known problems > is 6.0 > likely to ship, and of these which are likely to impact uniprocessor > systems? > Are any "showstopper" bugs merely being worked around for release? > And, again, > when is the likely release date? > > --Brett Glass Welp, it's in the RC stage, and I've not seen any reports of massive issues, so I imagine they'll move it through fairly quickly. For what it's worth, on UP, my 386 (stop laughing) is showing twice the inbound and outbound tcp throughput across multiple apps compared to 4.11. Disk throughput is slightly higher, but nothing super impressive. If 6.0 can show gains on a 386, that tells me there is some actual merit to the changes. Joshua Coombs