Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:16:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:16:20 -0400 Received: from roc-24-169-102-121.rochester.rr.com ([24.169.102.121]:35724 "EHLO roc-24-169-102-121.rochester.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:16:04 -0400 Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 14:16:28 -0400 From: Chris Mason To: Chris Rankin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Which is currently the most stable 2.4 kernel? Message-ID: <306940000.1002046587@tiny> In-Reply-To: <20011002180502.25799.qmail@web13102.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20011002180502.25799.qmail@web13102.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, October 02, 2001 11:05:02 AM -0700 Chris Rankin 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 - 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/