Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:16:00 -0800 | | From | Lawrence Walton <> | | Subject | Re: XFS for 2.4 |
| |
<snip> > Even if I am a bit off-topic here, please reconsider your last sentence. Don't > make people think that 2.6 is in a widely useable state right now. Just take a > look at the history of 2.4. Don't forget 2.4 can be used in boxes beyond 4 GB > only right _now_ (2.4.23), all previous versions fall completely apart on i386 > platform. 2.4 is right now nice, useable and pretty stable - and 2.6 has not > even begun to see the real-and-ugly world yet. There will for sure be a lot of > interesting test cases during the next months for 2.6, but there are quite an > amount of people that need a real stable environment - and that's why they will > have to use 2.4 for at least one year from now on. > Ye gods I'm going to regret butting into this conversation but...
I have moved a couple servers successfully to 2.6.0-pre9, felt (over) confident that 2.6.x would work on my busiest server. It was a mistake, lightly loaded it worked great. As user logged in that morning the server became unstable, processes started waiting forever and hanging, imap mostly, later exim and openldap. I never reported it for lack of good debugging info, I plan to take another wack at it in a month or so.
2.4.x is my only option, I would imagine I'm not in the minority here. I do use XFS, not on this particular server but I do use it and would like to see it included into 2.4.x for no other reason than 2.6.x is not stable in all situations.
-- *--* Mail: lawrence@otak.com *--* Voice: 425.739.4247 *--* Fax: 425.827.9577 *--* HTTP://the-penguin.otak.com/~lawrence -------------------------------------- - - - - - - O t a k i n c . - - - - -
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |