|
Hi!
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, John Gray wrote:
> Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Just Marc wrote:
> >> Debatable. People should know how to upgrade their kernels and should
> >> keep current when the situation permits --
> >
> > exactly. Where I work, you can upgrade only when the administrative
> > staff say so. We're running 2.4.21 here
> > and there is no move to allow upgrades.
> >
> > We all don't work for technically oriented administrators
> I was sticking with the 2.4 kernels 'cause we were having stability
> issue with 2.6. 2.6 seems quite stable now though. It seems to me it
> got much more stable somewhere around 2.6.10. We have a bunch of
> servers running recent 2.6 kernels that have been running rock solid for
> 4 months now, so I'm toying with moving the our lvs boxes to 2.6 now as
> well.
Then I suggest steering clear of the 2.6.16 series. I've had more
trouble with them network-wise (from broken TCP offloading to
downright dropping/ignoring packets) than with everything else in
2.4 and 2.6 combined. Especially, 2.6.16.18 reeks of network
troubles. The sky2 driver ist complete fscked.
As for frame of reference: I admin about 1k boxes with a team of
five other admins and we consent on this evaluation.
YMMV, of course, but I'd rather use 2.6.5 than 2.6.16.*.
Regards,
Tobias
PS: So far, 2.6.17.1 seems to be quite stable. Fellow admin
(herding about 150 boxes with *heavy* network traffic) swears by
2.6.15.something, though.
--
You don't need eyes to see, you need vision.
|
