Messages in this thread |  | | From | David Lang <> | Date | Tue, 16 Oct 2001 09:17:48 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: VM |
| |
I'm not doing a comparison of the VM in 2.4.5 and the newer kernels, I'm saying that based on the reports I have been seeing here I have not been willing to risk moving to a newer kernel becouse I couldn't trust the VM not to give me problems on my production boxes. the 2.4.5 has it's problems, but they are survivable (except on one box which I had to remove)
it's not a direct comparison of the kernels, it's a matter of being able to trust that the new kernel won't hang me out to dry under load. (and I am one of the many people out here who doesn't have the ability to simulate the load before going into production)
David Lang
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, John Levon wrote:
> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 13:28:51 +0100 > From: John Levon <moz@compsoc.man.ac.uk> > To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: VM > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 05:53:32PM -0700, David Lang wrote: > > > before switching my production machines from 2.4.5 to a newer kernel. > > running such an old kernel does not give a fair comparison. Personally I've > found the /current/ ac VM to be stable and give slightly smoother feel than > the linus tree VM. > > regards > john > > -- > "I hear you have four hundred and eighty six PCs for sale ?" > - Some Fool > - > 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/ > - 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/
|  |