From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 28 16:07:19 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 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 8758916A41C for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:07:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from matt@atopia.net) Received: from neptune.atopia.net (neptune.atopia.net [209.128.231.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EBDF43D5C for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:07:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from matt@atopia.net) Received: from [192.168.0.102] (pcp173257pcs.plsntv01.nj.comcast.net [68.46.70.16]) by neptune.atopia.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEA754124; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 12:07:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <42C175B6.7060702@atopia.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 12:07:18 -0400 From: Matt Juszczak User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041129) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Phillips References: <1119950428.22027.1.camel@tarkhil> <42C171AA.6090802@atopia.net> <42C173D9.3010408@Rainbow-IT.net> In-Reply-To: <42C173D9.3010408@Rainbow-IT.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: On recent crashes 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: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:07:19 -0000 Chris Phillips wrote: >> Vivek Khera wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 28, 2005, at 5:20 AM, Alex Povolotsky wrote: >>> >>>> Can anyone enlighten me, if recent crashes are on STABLE only or >>>> 5.4-RELEASE is affected as well? >>>> >>> >>> I have three boxes running 5.4-RELEASE. one is a mediumly-loaded >>> web server, and two are very heavily loaded database servers. none >>> of them ever crash. >>> >> > Matt Juszczak wrote: > >> Other people I've seen complain seem to be running SMP.... Not sure >> if that has anything to do with it but its the only similiarity I can >> pull out from any responses I've gotten. >> > > I have 5 modestly powered i386 boxes on 5.4-RELEASE and the only time > I have had any complaints regarding system stability, is when running > an SMP kernel AND Nagios (which is a known problem - I think it's with > Nagios rather than FreeBSD). Otherwise, I'm almost completely happy. > Nagios remotely or locally? I have nagios remotely that PINGS these machines constantly for uptime/downtime checks, but nagios isn't actually running on them as a process...