now with 3.x I have uptimes between 2/6 weeks!
with 2.x I had uptimbes between 2/6 months!
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Forrest W. Christian wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Didier Derny wrote:
>
> > freebsd seems running version after version and not stability...
>
> > in 1999 (3.x) I was not so sure at all, no stability too many problems.
>
> hmmm....
>
> # uptime
> 1:44AM up 46 days, 22:36, 1 user, load averages: 0.01, 0.02, 0.00
>
> This is on a 3.4-STABLE box. Prior to the last reboot (which I made
> because I somehow had missed compiling the kernel with an appropriate # of
> users), it had been up since 12/21/1999 when I cvsup'd it last.
>
> Don't let the low load averages fool you - this box is handling around
> 3000 popmail/imap3 accounts - and 100,000 messages go through it every
> day (mostly client relay).
>
> I don't remember the last time a freebsd box crashed around here unless I
> had hardware going bad.
>
> > In 2000 it's getting worse, for me FreeBSD is not stable at all
> > the future of FreeBSD is not so clear, version follow after version but
> > I still have no support for my sound board, realplayer, oracle...
> > The clients are telling me to install Linux instead of FreeBSD (for
> > oracle)...
>
> Linux Oracle 8.0.5 purportedly runs great on FreeBSD 3.x. See:
> http://www.lf.net/lf/pi/oracle/install-linux-oracle-on-freebsd
>
> I can't vouch for sound card support. I gave up using sound cards in
> any unix a while back INCLUDING Linux and FreeBSD... although I might try
> a unix box on my desktop for mbone stuff again now that it seems to be
> more stable from what I hear. I will grant that Linux tends to support
> more obscure hardware than FreeBSD, although I have found that driver
> quality under Linux tends to be spotty.
>
> The key to this whole thing is that in a lot of (if not most) cases,
> FreeBSD (in my opinion) runs Linux binaries better than Linux. Turn on
> linux binary compatibility and then use linux stuff to your hearts
> content.
>
> I have had friends which I have been talking to about how freebsd is
> better than linux go to web conferences and hearing everyone else say "run
> everything on freebsd and use linux emulation where necessary". This
> seems to be the trend at big web sites.
>
> > I've just finished uprading the machines to 3.4-release and you are
> > telling me that there is no future for 3.X...
>
> The way I read the whole topic is more like "4.x works great, and is
> stable, and people need to move there, so why drag out the lifetime of
> 3.x". I don't recommend .0 releases at all for production work, but if
> it turns out that 4.1 is at least as stable as 3.4 or 3.5 I don't see why
> we'd need a 3.6 or 3.7 or so on.
>
> > I'm about to buy a smp machine but I see so many horror stories on
> > the mailling lists that I'm not sure at all that I should use a smp
> > machine (or install linux instead of FreeBSD)...
>
> Let me tell you my experience with SMP - stability depends on the
> hardware. I have used SMP on both FreeBSD and on NetWare and on NT,
> (actually more NT than the others) and I can say that some hardware just
> won't work reliably with SMP. I've seen Dell Multi-CPU boxes get the
> motherboard replaced THREE times before it stabilizes. I've also seen
> machines which just couldn't run it at all. I've seen hardware where
> NetWare blows up on but runs NT in multiprocessor mode fine. And vice
> versa.
>
> I'm curious as to what hardware you're having all these problems
> with. Are you overclocking? Is the airflow adequate? What type of
> drives/controllers are you using? etc.... I really wonder if you've got
> some weird hardware problem which is plaguing (sp?) you.
>
> - Forrest W. Christian (forrestc@imach.com) KD7EHZ
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> iMach, Ltd., P.O. Box 5749, Helena, MT 59604 http://www.imach.com
> Solutions for your high-tech problems. (406)-442-6648
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message