Hi,
The UP server does the PPPoE, so that's OK. Has anyone
torture-tested any of the recent kernels? For
instance, I subsequently read a posting from Alan Cox
saying that 2.4.10 didn't survive overnight for him,
implying that he occasionally roasts penguins in some
kind of server-dungeon...
Cheers,
Chris
--- Chris Mason <mason@suse.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, October 02, 2001 11:05:02 AM -0700 Chris
> Rankin
> <rankincj@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > All that the servers would be doing would be
> > connecting to the Internet periodically using
> PPPoE
> > and DSL (with NAT), forwarding emails and
> performing
> > various CPU-bound tasks. They should both have
> ample
> > available memory and should not need to swap much,
> if
> > at all.
> >
> > Does anyone have any kernel recommendations /
> > counter-recommendations, please? One server is
> SMP,
> > the other is UP, and both are Intel architecture.
>
> PPP is not SMP safe in 2.4.x. You'll run into
> problems on any kernel
> there. Even on single processor systems, you need
> the ppp patch in
> 2.4.9-ac16 or 2.4.11pre1.
>
> Other than that, 2.4.10 + andrea's vmtweaks patch
> does well. 2.4.9-ac18 is
> a good alternative.
>
> -chris
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone.
http://phone.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 07 2001 - 21:00:23 EST