[plug] kernel 2.6.3 production-ready?

[Denis Brown]

Many thanks, Craig.

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Craig Ringer wrote:

> On Thu, 2004-03-04 at 00:11, Denis Brown wrote:
> > Is kernel 2.6.3 worth betting the farm on, stability-wise, to get my hands
> > on ACLs?   AFAICS, ACLs are natively in the 2.6 tree.
>
> Well, ext3 ACLs are. There doesn't seem to be reiserfs support for ACLs
> yet, and I don't know about other filesystems.
>
Sorry, quite right, that's what I meant - thinking only as far as the FS
I'm using <blush>

> > But this will be a production server - backed up, but a production machine
> > none the less - and I would prefer stability over convenience if that's
> > what it means.
>
> Hmm... well, I'm (reluctantly) using 2.6.3 in production, and it seems
> to work well. It seems very zippy when there are _lots_ of processes on
> the system.
>
Encouraging.

> I am, it turns out, having some trouble with LVM2, though - so if you're
> going to use LVM, test carefully first.
>
Despite all the Good Things (tm) said about LVM, I was not planning to use
it in this context.   If people want to do fancy things like change the
size of their mounted file systems - which I think is a feature of LVM,
correct me if wrong - I have a nice shiny scalpel for such people.   Hey,
there have to be advantages working in a medical environment :-)  (I know
it's more useful than that, such as with Craig's system snapshots, which
apparently worked brilliantly under the earlier kernel series.)

> In case
someone here might know
what's going on, this is what happens > when I try to create a snapshot:
>
Fingers crossed that someone will hit on / help you to hit on a fix,
Craig.

Cheers,
Denis