On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 07:54:12AM -0500, Andrew G. Hammond wrote:
> > > B) kernel?
> >
> > Very unlikely.
>
> Depends on which version of the kernel you're running and how much stress
> you're putting on the VM system. As you might recall, there was recently
> some changes and a bit of a mixup over the kernel's vm code. The old stuff
Argh, I just forgot about that. Of course you're right. Thsi could be the
reason. After all I wasn't able to tar 200MB with and earlier 2.4 release.
> in 2.2 is very stable and quite trustworthy. The newest stuff (2.4.14+)
> appears to be pretty stable too, but some of the stuff circa 2.4.9 has a less
As far as VM is concerned yes, but I'd recommend not using .14 (several
problems) and .15 (risk of data loss in umount). .16 seems to be okay.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael@Fam-Meskes.De
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire!
Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
