SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The FreeBSD project has announced a new stable version of the FreeBSD operating system. The announcement says that initial builds were "withdrawn" due to "several last-minute issues" and that
Users that have installed FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE from the images originally available on the mirrors or from freebsd-update(8) prior to the rebuild of the final release are urged to upgrade their systems to FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE-p1 immediately.
Among the changes are a new version of OpenSSH which no longer supports version 1 of the SSH protocol, support for 802.11n Wi-Fi, a port to 64-bit ARM processors, and graphics support in the bhyve hypervisor.
further reading:
errata
release notes
fossbytes
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Can anyone remember when the times were not hard, and money not scarce?
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Tuesday October 11 2016, @07:31PM
I can believe it, the old machine had 16 GB for a 6 TB array of dual raidz1's ( 8 x 1TB disks, with 2 SSDs for caching), along with 5 virtualized Linux Hosts on it.
While the setup was good, it would bog down after 30 odd days of running, and start running out of memory, you can't swap out the VirtualBox VMs, and you can't swap out the ARC cache, so the machine would eventually hang and reset. I believe 32GB will work the magic, hence the new machine will have that much. My client is a small business (3-5 people), so I can't really spec out massive enterprise hardware for their needs.
On larger machines which I worked on ZFS and FreeBSD works wonders, but we are talking 216 disk behemoths (3 rackmount 72 disk enclosures with FC to the head unit). Some serious money was thrown in that direction.
I guess I should have stated the RAM sizes in my original post. 16GB is pitifully small by modern standards, but the machine was old and a retrofit from the old Linux + HPArray RAID just to prove the concept and test out BSD/ZFS. Linux with an equivalent hardware raid didn't need as much RAM to function, plus I suspect the overcommit feature/bug in Linux allowed it to be run far closer to full utilisation most of the time.
(Score: 2) by fnj on Tuesday October 11 2016, @08:27PM
I don't have any problem at all running ZFS on CentOS6 with 16 GB for several years so far. Two 6-disk RAID-Z2 storage pools; 36 TB of total storage. I have had no problem with RAM exhaustion after multiple uptimes > 100 days.