Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:02:45 +0200 From: Martin Jessa <freebsd@yazzy.org> To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: is 5.x still too unstable? Message-ID: <20030910230245.56dea542.freebsd@yazzy.org> In-Reply-To: <200309101652.34637.x@Vex.Net> References: <200309101652.34637.x@Vex.Net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi. I moved all our production servers to 5.1. I've never had problems with any of them. I have one 5.1 box doing all sorts of things for a small ISP. It works as vpn server, mail server, web server, router, dns, dhcp, proxy and sql. So far after 2 months of uptime I didnt even have to touch it. The only one I did not dare to touch yet is our firewall and internal dns/dhcp server(years of uptime :) ). Hell, I even run one production box on 5.1-CURRENT and it works great. I'd say 5.1 works well enough to use it on servers. On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:52:34 -0400 Tim Middleton <x@Vex.Net> wrote: > > I am hoping to move some of the servers in our ISP to FreeBSD. I have been > rather hoping 5.2 would be reliable enough, so that we can move to it and > enjoy all the -CURRENT goodness. > > The test server locked up yesterday, during some heavy port building, after > running for weeks with no problem. (-; I've not gone to investigate the > cause yet. But it has me nervous. It's been difficult to get FreeBSD accepted > at all here, so I'm wanting it to make a good impression. > > I have run 5 at home since 5.0-Release (currently 20030821 snapshot); and > while there have been problems now and again with a few builds, once these > have been solved my system here has been really very stable, which gave me > hope it would be also OK for work... > > So what is the general opinion of those here? Should i play it safe and go > back to 4.x until 5.x becomes officially "stable". Or do people think that > for most general purpose stuff 5.x should be generally stable "enough"? > "Enough" is a bit of a difficult word to define... of course one wants rock > solid for a server... but one may be able to tolerate some sorts of problems > as long as they can be sorted out quickly, and things are moving towards > ultimate stability in the near future. These aren't huge servers (no > multi-processor)... but moderately busy. Running the usual sorts of things... > apache, postfix, python, zope, nfs, etc. > > I realise my post may be a little premature when I haven't even checked out > what seems to have taken the test box down yet; but it's been on my mind to > solicit opinions here before this happened, so... any thoughts or experiences > running 5x on ISP servers to share out there? Are some snapshots known to be > better than others? Any tips/tweaks on making 5.x just a little more > stable---even at the cost of performance---than a default install (like > disabling acpi, as the first thing). > > -- > Tim Middleton | Cain Gang Ltd | A man is rich in proportion to the number of > x@veX.net | www.Vex.Net | things which he can afford to let alone. HDT > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-isp@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-isp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030910230245.56dea542.freebsd>