Either, I think in general SMP is tough to get stable. People with more experience will hopefully reply and explain in more detail. For now I, personally, would disable smp on freebsd just to keep it stable.
Joe On 6/28/05, Matt Juszczak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On OpenBSD or FreeBSD? > > On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Joe . wrote: > > > Can you live with just one processor? You would probably have much > > better luck with SMP disabled. > > > > Joe > > > > On 6/28/05, Matt Juszczak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Some of you have read my posts from the previous few days but I am really > >> stuck right now. Sorry if this is repeated information for anyone. > >> > >> We're running FreeBSD at work on our main mail server, which is now > >> crashing 2 times per day. I need to find a new solution soon, or I could > >> risk losing my job which would really stink. > >> > >> The machine itself is fine, and I know this because 1) I've tested the > >> memory and 2) This problem I am experiencing is occuring on more than one > >> machine. > >> > >> OpenBSD is known for its stability, and I'm wondering what everyone's > >> opinion on stability would be with a SuperMicro Dual Xeon 3.06 ghz (SMP) > >> and 4 GM RAM, running postfix with LDAP and 10,000 users. If I can get a > >> stable system up and running I'll be really happy. > >> > >> Apparently, there is something called a ttwakeup bug and there's some SMP > >> code problems in FreeBSD 5.4 that wasn't apparent in 4.11 (which is why > >> that runs stable for me) causing all these problems. I would hope that > >> with the branch off of OpenBSD these problems wouldn't exist in the OS. > >> > >> Any responses would be appreciated :) > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Matt > >> > >> > > > > > > !DSPAM:42c19294733741233197424!
