[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: which version to consider "stable?"

To: "Quanah Gibson-Mount" <quanah@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: which version to consider "stable?"
From: "John Madden" <jmadden@ivytech.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:54:07 -0500 (EST)
Cc: openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org, "Quanah Gibson-Mount" <quanah@stanford.edu>
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <FEDE5172B3A5202CC5BB8C96@cadabra-sw.stanford.edu>
References: <33722.10.0.14.46.1136815479.squirrel@mail.ivytech.edu> <FEDE5172B3A5202CC5BB8C96@cadabra-sw.stanford.edu>
User-agent: SquirrelMail

> 2.3.16 will likely be marked stable in the very near future.  I would use
> 2.3.13 or 2.3.16 over 2.3.11. (14 & 15 have a performance bug fixed in .16).

Welp, I didn't have much choice.  I had a make && make test sitting on the box
just in case there was a crash today (it wasn't dying very often under the
less-than-max load), but it only lasted about 4 hours, so I took my chances and
went `make install` after the crash.  Time will tell, I suppose, just how much
better 2.3.16 is than 2.3.11.  I am seeing some unfriendly cpu usage but I haven't
had time yet to track down where it's coming from; more on that later.

John




-- 
John Madden
UNIX Systems Engineer
Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana
jmadden@ivytech.edu

References:
- which version to consider "stable?"
  - From: "John Madden" <jmadden@ivytech.edu>
- Re: which version to consider "stable?"
  - From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@stanford.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: which version to consider "stable?"
Next by Date: Re: which version to consider "stable?"
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread