Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 00:34:58 +0100 From: Dominic Marks <dom@goodforbusiness.co.uk> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: Matt Juszczak <matt@atopia.net>, Maciej Wierzbicki <voovoos-stable@killfile.pl> Subject: Re: Two Options: which to choose? Message-ID: <200507010034.58982.dom@goodforbusiness.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20050630175234.J67125@neptune.atopia.net> References: <20050630164529.D65760@neptune.atopia.net> <20050630213541.GA26335@mail.media4u.pl> <20050630175234.J67125@neptune.atopia.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 30 June 2005 22:53, Matt Juszczak wrote: > > After changing to PF I did not notice single crash for month > > (production servers with, sometimes, heavy load). > > > > I would try FreeBSD with PF anyway. Works perfectly. > > You say it didn't crash for a month, but then you say to try FreeBSD > with PF because it works perfectly. To me, a month of uptime isn't > perfectly. Can you elaborate? Is your machine still crashing even > though its taking a month instead of a few days like it did > previously? Could you not use pfsync to mitigate the problem (at least partially)? As for your original question, I think its less work to change your hardware to something you know works than changing operating systems. Why not use single CPU machines for this? > Thanks, > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Dominic GoodforBusiness.co.uk I.T. Services for SMEs in the UK.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200507010034.58982.dom>