Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 15 Oct 2005 23:03:53 -0400
From:      "Joshua Coombs" <jcoombs@gwi.net>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: 6.0 release date and stability
Message-ID:  <disfuq$iag$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <200510152346.RAA20742@lariat.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

"Brett Glass" <brett@lariat.net> wrote in message 
news:200510152346.RAA20742@lariat.net...
> The release schedule for FreeBSD 6.0, on the FreeBSD Web site, 
> doesn't show a
> projected date for the finished product.  How close is it? We are 
> (believe it
> or not) still running and building production servers with 4.11, and 
> would
> love to move to 6.0 (at least for uniprocessor systems; we may wait 
> for 6.1
> for SMP) if it is sufficiently stable and performs adequately.
>
> We're running our own tests on RC1, but don't have a lot of spare 
> servers to
> try it on. So, it's worth asking: How stable is RC1 turning out to 
> be on
> uniprocessor platforms?  On SMP platforms? How is network and disk 
> performance
> relative to 4.11? (When we tested 5.x, both network and file system
> performance were worse than that of 4.11.) With what known problems 
> is 6.0
> likely to ship, and of these which are likely to impact uniprocessor 
> systems?
> Are any "showstopper" bugs merely being worked around for release? 
> And, again,
> when is the likely release date?
>
> --Brett Glass

Welp, it's in the RC stage, and I've not seen any reports of massive 
issues, so I imagine they'll move it through fairly quickly.

For what it's worth, on UP, my 386 (stop laughing) is showing twice 
the inbound and outbound tcp throughput across multiple apps compared 
to 4.11.  Disk throughput is slightly higher, but nothing super 
impressive.  If 6.0 can show gains on a 386, that tells me there is 
some actual merit to the changes.

Joshua Coombs 





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?disfuq$iag$1>