Re: 6.1 stability (Re: 4.11 snapshots?)
At 08:09 PM 5/21/2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: We did ourselves a big disservice by not pointing out clearly in the todo list that most of the listed problems are VERY RARE and are unlikely to affect most/all users. In future we're going to have to be clearer about that, because you're not the only user who was scared for no reason. We really had to push FreeBSD hard to find those problems; The servers I build are pushed really hard. 6.1 stands up to enormous test loads that all previous tested releases could not handle. I wouldn't be surprised if 4.x cannot handle the same workloads, simply because no-one may have ever attempted such loads on a 4.x system. Kris P.S. If you're willing to put some effort into analyzing and profiling it, I'd be willing to work with you on your performance problem. You sound like one of those e-mails I keep getting offering to help me with my, er, performance problems. ;-) Seriously: The problem is that in my tests 6.x does not surpass Linux in performance, while 4.11 does. --Brett Glass ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 01:22:59PM +0300, Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote: Hello! On Tue, 16 May 2006, Colin Percival wrote: Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months from now, and the 4.x-[56].x upgrade path is non-trivial, I recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead. Well, have you seen my simple performance benchmarking RELENG_4 vs 6? IMHO it mimics quote common usage pattern: it just downloads a large file with 10Mbps rate and stores it on UFS filesystem. On the same hardware (i386 uniprocessor Celeron-333 system with 128Mb RAM and fast SAMSUNG SP0802N HDD using UDMA33) under the same conditions, using more optimal config (INVARIANTS removed) RELENG_6 (and 5) _still_ uses = 50% of CPU time for (Intr+Sys), while RELENG_4 doesn't use more than 28% for them. So (unless this performance difference will be minimized) I predict _a lot_ of requests to extend RELENG_4 support further, because people just couldn't afford 4-6 upgrade due to a loss of performance. This is a network+filesystem benchmark, and it's probably the network part that is using extra CPU, not the filesystem part. But until you run those profiling tests we can't be sure. Kris pgpLxj04Kg5CZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 07:35:53PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be happy with 6.x due to memory requirements. They also might have slower file access (The file system in FreeBSD 6.x still isn't as snappy as the one in 4.x, though I hope this will change). So, we'd like to upgrade them to a patch level that includes all recent security fixes. Are ISOs available? FYI, it is only soft updates (really bufdaemon, through which all the I/O passes) that has performance problems under high load on 6.x compared to 4.x. Other mount modes perform quite a bit better (e.g. 30% faster for async write performance) than 4.x on the hardware I tested. http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/bsdcan/Filesystem%20Performance.pdf Kris P.S. Don't link to the above URL, I need to send it to Dan for publication on the BSDCan site, to which you should link instead. pgpG9rwhX0lLL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last month), it shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us over until September. (Hopefully, Colin and the summer of code folks can work on performance enhancements to the network stack, UFS2, and the hard disk device drivers in time for the 6.2 release in September. I'm just a little scared of 6.1, given the known problems that couldn't be fixed in time and the slower performance we're seeing on databases, etc.) --Brett ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
On Sun, 2006-May-21 13:20:24 -0600, Brett Glass wrote: Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last month), it shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us over Maybe for April 1st next year - though novel April Fools Day jokes are always much better. -- Peter Jeremy ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 01:20:24PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last month), it shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us over until September. (Hopefully, Colin and the summer of code folks can work on performance enhancements to the network stack, UFS2, and the hard disk device drivers in time for the 6.2 release in September. I'm just a little scared of 6.1, given the known problems that couldn't be fixed in time and the slower performance we're seeing on databases, etc.) release(7) FreeBSD provides a complete build environment suitable for users to make full releases of the FreeBSD operating system. In the week that this email thread has been kicking around you could have made one yourself. Andrew ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6.1 stability (Re: 4.11 snapshots?)
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:03:33AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote: On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 01:20:24PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: Well, y'know, if they could release a FreeBSD 2.2.9 (as was done last month), it shouldn't be a problem to do a 4.12 release as a last gasp to tide us over until September. (Hopefully, Colin and the summer of code folks can work on performance enhancements to the network stack, UFS2, and the hard disk device drivers in time for the 6.2 release in September. I'm just a little scared of 6.1, given the known problems that couldn't be fixed in time and the slower performance we're seeing on databases, etc.) We did ourselves a big disservice by not pointing out clearly in the todo list that most of the listed problems are VERY RARE and are unlikely to affect most/all users. In future we're going to have to be clearer about that, because you're not the only user who was scared for no reason. We really had to push FreeBSD hard to find those problems; 6.1 stands up to enormous test loads that all previous tested releases could not handle. I wouldn't be surprised if 4.x cannot handle the same workloads, simply because no-one may have ever attempted such loads on a 4.x system. Kris P.S. If you're willing to put some effort into analyzing and profiling it, I'd be willing to work with you on your performance problem. pgp3834QpJGhf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
You could build your own snapshots It's not hard (hint 'man release'). Seth Brett Glass wrote: Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be happy with 6.x due to memory requirements. They also might have slower file access (The file system in FreeBSD 6.x still isn't as snappy as the one in 4.x, though I hope this will change). So, we'd like to upgrade them to a patch level that includes all recent security fixes. Are ISOs available? --Brett Glass ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
Hello! On Tue, 16 May 2006, Colin Percival wrote: Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months from now, and the 4.x-[56].x upgrade path is non-trivial, I recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead. Well, have you seen my simple performance benchmarking RELENG_4 vs 6? IMHO it mimics quote common usage pattern: it just downloads a large file with 10Mbps rate and stores it on UFS filesystem. On the same hardware (i386 uniprocessor Celeron-333 system with 128Mb RAM and fast SAMSUNG SP0802N HDD using UDMA33) under the same conditions, using more optimal config (INVARIANTS removed) RELENG_6 (and 5) _still_ uses = 50% of CPU time for (Intr+Sys), while RELENG_4 doesn't use more than 28% for them. So (unless this performance difference will be minimized) I predict _a lot_ of requests to extend RELENG_4 support further, because people just couldn't afford 4-6 upgrade due to a loss of performance. Colin Percival Sincerely, Dmitry -- Atlantis ISP, System Administrator e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote: Well, have you seen my simple performance benchmarking RELENG_4 vs 6? IMHO it mimics quote common usage pattern: it just downloads a large file with 10Mbps rate and stores it on UFS filesystem. On the same hardware (i386 uniprocessor Celeron-333 system with 128Mb RAM and fast SAMSUNG SP0802N HDD using UDMA33) under the same conditions, using more optimal config (INVARIANTS removed) RELENG_6 (and 5) _still_ uses = 50% of CPU time for (Intr+Sys), while RELENG_4 doesn't use more than 28% for them. Just as a test for RELENG_6, could you try setting kern.hz=100 in your loader.conf, and repeating your tests? I'm just guessing, but maybe the higher interrupt rate is a bit too much for an old Celeron... :) Cheers, Dimitry ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
Hello! On Wed, 17 May 2006, Dimitry Andric wrote: (INVARIANTS removed) RELENG_6 (and 5) _still_ uses = 50% of CPU time for (Intr+Sys), while RELENG_4 doesn't use more than 28% for them. Just as a test for RELENG_6, could you try setting kern.hz=100 in your loader.conf, and repeating your tests? I'm just guessing, but maybe the higher interrupt rate is a bit too much for an old Celeron... :) This (setting kern.hz=100 in loader.conf) was actually the first thing that I've done in order to get fair comparison. My numbers are got with hz = 100 for every RELENG_x (x=4,5,6). Cheers, Dimitry Sincerely, Dmitry -- Atlantis ISP, System Administrator e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
Plamen Stoev wrote: Brett Glass wrote: At 08:42 PM 5/15/2006, pete wright wrote: according to this link 4.11 is a supported errata branch: http://www.freebsd.org/releng/ here is a link to the errata policy: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.11R/errata_policy.html you should be able to sync your source via cvsup from official freebsd mirrors. True. But this requires assembling a system to do it, and then waiting hours while I build the world and make release. I was hoping that there was a snapshot server up, as there was in Japan a few years ago. This may help: http://snapshots.jp.freebsd.org/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Also at the bottom of that page under the FAQ heading it spells out where to get the older snapshots :-) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
At 09:19 AM 5/16/2006, Randy Rowe wrote: Also at the bottom of that page under the FAQ heading it spells out where to get the older snapshots :-) Alas, those snapshots are old indeed. The latest is from August of last year! There does not seem to be a snapshot of the 4.11 security branch available with the latest patches -- especially the Sendmail patch. Since 4.xx is still in such widespread use, it does seem to me that one of those sites ought to have a build with the latest patches -- if for no other reason than to prevent people from picking up the older ones and leaving their machines vulnerable. --Brett Glass ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
If you absolutely must run FreeBSD 4.11, install the RELEASE and then run FreeBSD Update. Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months from now, and the 4.x-[56].x upgrade path is non-trivial, I recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead. Colin Percival ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
Colin: We'd like to. But we need the servers we're building to outperform Linux in file and database operations, and they only do that under 4.11. Also, the 6.1 release engineering page showed some worrisome problems -- including such things as potential problems with the Intel fxp and em drivers (which we absolutely can't have). It's gone now, but while it was up it said that work on those issues was still in progress, that the fixes needed testing, and/or that they were being deferred to the next release. So, some of these machines will have to get 4.11. We can't be on the cutting edge all of the time when we're making production servers. In some cases, what we need is a tried-and-true version with bug fixes. --Brett Glass At 11:04 AM 5/16/2006, Colin Percival wrote: If you absolutely must run FreeBSD 4.11, install the RELEASE and then run FreeBSD Update. Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months from now, and the 4.x-[56].x upgrade path is non-trivial, I recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead. Colin Percival ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4.11 snapshots?
Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be happy with 6.x due to memory requirements. They also might have slower file access (The file system in FreeBSD 6.x still isn't as snappy as the one in 4.x, though I hope this will change). So, we'd like to upgrade them to a patch level that includes all recent security fixes. Are ISOs available? --Brett Glass ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
On 5/15/06, Brett Glass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a server currently furnishing snapshots of the FreeBSD 4.11 security branch? We have some servers running various 4.x versions that might not be happy with 6.x due to memory requirements. They also might have slower file access (The file system in FreeBSD 6.x still isn't as snappy as the one in 4.x, though I hope this will change). So, we'd like to upgrade them to a patch level that includes all recent security fixes. Are ISOs available? according to this link 4.11 is a supported errata branch: http://www.freebsd.org/releng/ here is a link to the errata policy: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.11R/errata_policy.html you should be able to sync your source via cvsup from official freebsd mirrors. -pete -- ~~o0OO0o~~ Pete Wright www.nycbug.org NYC's *BSD User Group ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.11 snapshots?
At 08:42 PM 5/15/2006, pete wright wrote: according to this link 4.11 is a supported errata branch: http://www.freebsd.org/releng/ here is a link to the errata policy: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.11R/errata_policy.html you should be able to sync your source via cvsup from official freebsd mirrors. True. But this requires assembling a system to do it, and then waiting hours while I build the world and make release. I was hoping that there was a snapshot server up, as there was in Japan a few years ago. --Brett Glass ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
