Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 18:30:50 -0500 From: Jeremy McMillan <aphor@ripco.NOSPAM.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Vinum performance testing... Message-ID: <37E02C2A.5F782855@ripco.NOSPAM.com> References: <199909152109.OAA02151@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
***** skip the following three paragraphs if you're not interested in the politics ***** This is funny. Not funny "ha ha", but I think it's actually indicative of the high quality of free software: we have to argue whether pre-release features/functionality should be used in critical production machines. I agree that "sworn-off" is bad form, but the proper response is that FreeBSD has a well developed and executed quality control protocol. Nobody here has *any* reason to foist inadequate software on anyone else. The other side of it is *everybody* here has good reason to prevent urban legends from undermining the FreeBSD project. BTW: (IMnsHO) any business that can tolerate the unknown risks of WinNT in production can also handle the calculated risks of FreeBSD-STABLE and its marginal technology. We need to be very careful (and honest) about what those risks are. ***** start reading here if you're skimming ***** Which brings me to my question: If I were to experiment with vinum reliability, what *exactly* should I toy with to create failures, and what would they look like? (please respond to me directly and not the list, unless you can redirect the thread to a better list with some background in this question) Mike Smith wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 01:01:50PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote: > > > > After getting seriously burned (fortunately, during initial system > > > > configuration), I've sworn off vinum for any sort of critical production > > > > use. > > > > > > Of course, this is an absurdly myopic view to take of a product that's > > > still under development. It's people like yourself and statements like > > > that that give open-development software products a bad name. 8( > > > > No offense, but you are wrong and he is right. A 'still under developement' > > product should NOT be used for critical production machines. > > Perhaps we're seeing this differently, but "sworn off vinum" says to me > "never using it again", and that's the point I was trying to make. > People try something that's still under development, get bitten, and > then claim forever after that the product is dangerous, regardless of > whether or not it's subsequently fixed. > > This is a _major_ image issue. > > > I am sure > > when vinum is more robust and less likely to much your data for dinner > > he, and many other people who use FreeBSD in situations where data loss > > is not an option, will reconsider it's use. > > I'm not convinced of this, but worse still are the people that, having > read Michael's message, or turned it up in a year's time, will never > assess it for themselves because they're scared off by these > unqualified comments. -- PLEASE NOTICE: THERE MAY BE NOSPAM IN THE HEADERS WHEN YOU HIT "REPLY"!!! Jeremy McMillan <aphor at ripco.com> | Ask for PGP-2.6.2 or 5.0i Chicago FreeBSD Users Group http://pages.ripco.com/~aphor/ChiFUG.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37E02C2A.5F782855>