On 5/31/12 12:32 PM, Holger Kipp wrote:
> Am 31.05.2012 um 12:24 schrieb "Lars Engels" <lars.engels@0x20...>:
>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:06:55PM +0200, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
>>> On 5/30/12 8:20 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
>>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>> This is off-topic, so please feel free to disregard it, but I'm sending it to this list in the hope that it will reach a largish number of users.
>>>> I am currently looking at updating some of our advocacy material (which advertises exciting new features like SMP support), and before I do I'd like to get a better feel for why the rest of you are using FreeBSD. If you had to list the three things you most like about FreeBSD, which would you pick? Are they the same as when you first started using it?
>>> We're using FreeBSD here only for firewall boxes.
>>> Reasons for using FBSD for firewalls:
>>> - CARP
>>> - relayd
>>> - PF
>>> - pfsync
>>> Reasons I can't get management to use FBSD for regular servers (web,
>>> haproxy, db...):
>>> - "hard" to use
>>> - update process is "hard", time-consuming and annoying (as opposed to
>>> debian's for example)
>>> A regular debian update is 5 minutes + reboot
>>> A regular FBSD update is about 1.5 hour + 3 reboots (after
>>> installkernel, installworld, rebuild of ports)
>> But how often do you need to update?
> That reminds me - there is still a 2.2.8 system up and running that needs to be replaced ;-)
> For a server farm, one can use a central server who provides all packages that need to be upgraded, so it is usually only one system that needs a longer time. All others just mount the directories and install/upgrade using compiled world and /usr/ports/packages/All :-)
> Nice and easy.
> Best regards,
Your idea has merit and we've already considered it.
However, these boxes are on different VLANs for security and confinement
reasons and I loathe putting them on a shared VLAN just for this purpose.
Besides, if the main server were to crash, we'd run into problems.
We don't wish to introduce a SPOF.