On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:41:39PM +0100, Edgar Fu? wrote: > After the recent problems[*] we've been having with our (4.0/amd64) > file server, I'll surely be facing the question why we're not using > that other OS everybody else does. > > So I need some data for that upcoming discussion. Who is using > NetBSD to operate a file server on a scale comparable to or larger > than ours, i.e. ~200 users, ~1TB storage? If so, which version on > what kind of hardware?
4.0 is Very Olde at this point, and amd64 in 4.0 was not quite fully baked yet. It is definitely not what I would choose to run in production. (I don't run a fileserver per se but I do have some machines with real load on them. I moved them all to -5 ages ago.) If I were setting up a new fileserver right now I'd put 6.0_BETA on it, even in production. There may be some problems still, but there are two overriding considerations vs 5.1_STABLE: (1) a pile of vfs-level deadlocks have been fixed (not all the fixes can be applied to 5.1_STABLE) and (2) Manuel Bouyer's new quotas that don't need quotacheck. I've had pretty good luck over the years using -current in production, too. FWIW. Good luck trying that with That Other OS. ;-) > [*] Panic on quotaoff, HD failure on parity rebuild, failure to > negotiate sync SCSI with the replacement drive on attach, another > panic when trying to interrupt the reconstruction, lost disklabel > on the RAID set afterwards, then a damaged FS with need for manual > fsck. Loads of fun from ~1pm to ~1am. Blah. Do you have the details for the quotaoff panic? Although if it was caused by hardware it may not be much help. -- David A. Holland [email protected]
