Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:38:40 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quality of FreeBSD Message-ID: <20050722013605.U16902@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20050722001253.GA70277@FS.denninger.net> References: <200507211803.j6LI34dV005050@ferens.net> <20050721194500.W9208@fledge.watson.org> <20050721192613.GA61902@FS.denninger.net> <6.2.1.2.0.20050721153750.0851fab0@64.7.153.2> <20050721202234.GA62615@FS.denninger.net> <20050722004340.H16902@fledge.watson.org> <20050722001253.GA70277@FS.denninger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Karl Denninger wrote: > If Soren BELIEVES (2) is the case, I'll test against -BETA1, IF I can > have confirmation that -BETA1 has the ATA-NG code in it. > > Its trivially easy for me to reproduce this problem on my sandbox > machine. As has already been stated, Soren's changes are in 6.x. If you are able to test this workload against 6.0-BETA1 using the hardware in question, that would be very helpful. Depending on the nature of the workload and problem, you might find you need to compile out the debugging features, as they slow things down quite a bit, so might reduce the transaction rate sufficiently to make the problem fail to occur. If it requires 5.x applications, you might find you have to wait for BETA2. Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050722013605.U16902>