steve rader wrote:
> Is it safe to assume 2.0.36 is more stable with 0.9x than
> with 0.42?
Well, I've run a busy file server with 2.0.3x and 0.9x RAID patches from
november/december in uninterrupted production use without a single
problem (at RAID-5). I don't know about the stability of 0.42, but this
setup certainly is stable.
Now, the list has had several references to 2.2 and the latest patches
crashing programs with out of memory errors during extremely heavy I/O
(I/O buffers not getting freed as they should and kernel running out of
memory, apparently), so there apparently is something seriously wrong
there. I can vouch for the stability of the earlier patches, though.
--
osma ahvenlampi || | || | | | || | r a z o r f i s h
| | | | h e l s i n k i
