Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:35:59 +0000 From: "TEC Meganet" <tec@mega.net.br> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD data size tuning Message-ID: <20031121.xr9.90600300@admin.mega.net.br>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dear Eric I must disagree, nobody is speaking about paranoid or patches. Conservative may have a lot of interpretations but it is the secure way. You should know what the pioneers get into their backs, so in production, at leat a responsible IT manager, can not risk to catch arrows. May be we have a different understanding about production server, it is not the machine with internet access and crisscrossing trying patches or whatever. I am writing this on a 4.9 box but my internet server are rock stable 4.8 servers which I will upgrade when I saw with my own eyes 4.9ers holding a bunch of php requests, sql traffic, hack tries, icmp floods and resets and all this wired things. Until the vendor suggest for whatever reason wait for a newer version then - for me - there is nothing clearer. So what I want to state here is that each one may have different interpretations, because of his skills or his time or his responsibilities. But at the end production means production and it is that what machines have to do, each minute down is money away. And - somebody had a problem and I only gave my personal opinion. Please accept mine like I accept yours. Eric Anderson (anderson@centtech.com) wrote*: > >TEC Meganet wrote: > >>now you're touching the art of speaking and understanding ... certainly also a >>performance so it fits well here :) >> >>if the maker of the software says stay with the old one until the newer one is >>ready it is for me a very clear statement, special in context with talking about >>PAE >> >>or the writer should learn to write better ... >> >This is one of those "subject to interpretation" things. I read the >"our most conservative users" to mean "our users who never apply patches >or upgrade until they are 6 months old". Plus, if you notice, they are >saying "use 5.1, 5.2, 4.9, or if you are paranoid, stick with 4.8" - and >I understand, it's basically the same thing I tell a user who is prone >to complain about every change or bump when moving to something newer. >For those users, I say "if you don't like the pain of change, don't change". > >I can't argue with your interpretation - it's perfectly valid. So - use >4.8. > >Eric > > > >>Eric Anderson (anderson@centtech.com) wrote*: >> >> >>>TEC Meganet wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>it's here >>>>http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.9R/announce.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>It says: >>>"We encourage all our users to evaluate FreeBSD 5.1 and the upcoming >>>5.2. Because PAE support has only been a feature in 4.X for a few >>>months, it has not received wide-spread testing, and our most >>>conservative users may wish to stay with FreeBSD 4.8 until they choose >>>to migrate to 5.X." >>> >>>Which is a lot different than: >>> >>>"The BSd people suggest not using 4.9in production servers." >>> >>> >>> >>>>Peter Pentchev (roam@ringlet.net) wrote*: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 12:12:03PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote: >>>>>Content-Description: signed data >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>On Friday 21 November 2003 10:52, TEC Meganet wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>The BSd people suggest not using 4.9 >>>>>>>in production servers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>They do? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>No. Or at least, I know of no such thing, and it would be interesting >>>>>to learn where and who and how has anything like that been suggested :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------ >Eric Anderson Systems Administrator Centaur Technology >All generalizations are false, including this one. >------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031121.xr9.90600300>