5.2.1 stability

From: Adam Maloney (adam_at_whee.org)
Date: 05/07/04

  • Next message: Doug Rabson: "Re: nVidia FX Support?" 
    To: <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 11:25:43 -0500

    We've been having SMP issues with 4.9 and 4.10 on a couple different pieces
    of hardware, but have had success with 5.2.1. I asked this particular
    question ons freebsd-table, but I think -current might be a better place for
    it.

    If we can get our necessary services running on these boxes under 5.2.1, how
    stable is it likely to be? Basically, if I setup one of these boxes as a
    mailserver, and it will only ever be a mailserver, can I expect the 5.2.1
    codebase to behave in the long term?

    I'm just trying to make a decision, whether to limp along without SMP
    under -STABLE, or chance stability but have the SMP performance.

    Thanks in advance,

    Adam

    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: Doug Rabson: "Re: nVidia FX Support?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Cluster computing drawbacks
      ... |> SMP CPUs by spawning multiple processes and threads. ... boxes of a cluster. ... a few CPUs, for reasons that we could go into but are irrelevant. ... The point is that, if processes don't communicate, they can perfectly ...
      (comp.arch)
    • Please confirm: top(1) cpu time broken on FreeBSD 6.1 (RELEASE/STABLE) SMP ?
      ... upgraded SMP 2 CPU boxes. ... Boxes are upgraded from 5.5 to ... All of them have SMP kernels, just using the provided GENERIC and SMP ...
      (freebsd-stable)
    • Re: OOPS: 2.6.16-rc6 cpufreq_conservative
      ... boxes without trouble but I can't even safely modprobe it on SMP - it nearly ... The new set of patches pretty much make conservative's codebase identical to ... depends!SMP - I am planning to submit a patch soon. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Please confirm: top(1) cpu time broken on FreeBSD 6.1 (RELEASE/STABLE) SMP ?
      ... upgraded SMP 2 CPU boxes. ... Boxes are upgraded from 5.5 to ... sum of idle time never goes below 50.0% idle! ... as on IBM 306M Dual Core SMP systems. ...
      (freebsd-stable)
    • Re: implications of SMP kernel on UP
      ... I've observed substantial performance overhead from enabling SMP on UP ... However, increasing numbers of "UP" boxes ship with HTT, blurring ... creating "HAL" modules that plug and play locking operations, ... It's worth noting, FYI, that we always compile modules with locked atomic ...
      (freebsd-hackers)