Hello, I've been using 4.X branch for production servers. Yesterday I bought box in datacenter with RAID 1 controller and operators in DC set up FreeBSD 5.X for me (instead 4.X i asked) because they have troubles with set up RAID controller runing on 4.X. I have two options: Posting with Datacenter and try to convince them to make RAID 1 running on 4.X (I found on freebsd-hardware list that 3ware 7006-2 controller runing fine). or Runing production server (Apache, Mysql, Postfix + ATA RAID 1) on 5.X. I would like to know your opinion about 5.3-STABLE for this pourpose. I googled some and found that it isn't good idea but all those opinions was pretty old (related for ex. to older BETA version of 5.X branch) kind regards, -- Pawel
In my experience 5.3 is quite good for production and you should not be afraid to use it instead of 4.X I have been running a few 5.3 boxes in production for a while without problems and im planning to replace the rest of my servers with 5.3 -- ?sak Ben, http://www.isak.is ---------- Original Message ----------- From: PawelG <pawel@mcmail.pl> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Sent: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:08:55 +0100 Subject: 5.3 STABLE for production server?> Hello, > > I've been using 4.X branch for production servers. Yesterday I bought > box in datacenter with RAID 1 controller and operators in DC set up FreeBSD > 5.X for me (instead 4.X i asked) because they have troubles with set up > RAID controller runing on 4.X. > > I have two options: > > Posting with Datacenter and try to convince them to make RAID 1 > running on 4.X (I found on freebsd-hardware list that 3ware 7006-2 > controller runing fine). > > or > > Runing production server (Apache, Mysql, Postfix + ATA RAID 1) on 5.X. > > I would like to know your opinion about 5.3-STABLE for this > pourpose. I googled some and found that it isn't good idea but all > those opinions was pretty old (related for ex. to older BETA version > of 5.X branch) > > kind regards, > > -- > Pawel > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"------- End of Original Message -------
I have been running apache, postfix, postgresql on a 5.3 mashine and the only problems i have faced was with sshd and time outs and even then most of the problem was with my named.conf. 5.3 seems to be doing great! much better than the ones before it, and i am on a dual amd system. The only down time to speak of has been for kernel changes has never crashed on its own. btw. to the freebsd team keep doing what ever your doing, thx for a stable system. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.5.4 - Release Date: 12/15/2004
PawelG wrote:><cut> > > I would like to know your opinion about 5.3-STABLE for this > pourpose. I googled some and found that it isn't good idea but all > those opinions was pretty old (related for ex. to older BETA version > of 5.X branch) > >At this moment I think that when setting up a new box (fresh install) 5 will just do fine, in my case however I have a couple boxes already using 4.10, in that case I will not upgrade to 5 but instead to 4.11, actually I use RELENG_4 and rebuild everything (when appropriate, depends on SA) on a build/test machine and then install it on the production machines. So it depends a bit on your taste, someday I have to upgrade my machines too, because SA will no longer be patched in the 4 tree (not in the near future though). Till then I have time to decide if I go with 5 or something else like DragonFly, it all depends if I feel comfortable with that OS and even more important is it a good enough solution for my technical problems/needs. my0.02? -- mph