phk at phk.freebsd.dk
Mon Aug 31 17:44:06 CEST 2015
In message <55E46E5A.606 at schokola.de>, Nils Goroll writes:
>> until we know and have fixed whatever caused Geoffs test to run poorly.
>I feel unhappy about dedicating a whole VDD to working on issues [...]
I don't want to spend the entire VDD on it.
But so far, Geoffs test is the only live(-ish) test of -trunk
I have heard of in a looong time, so I'm treating the failure(-ish)
of the test very seriously.
If I had more test-reports and they said differently, I would be
more inclined to discount Geoffs data point, but having *only* that
data point, I cannot ignore it.
>Specific performance issues, should they exist, are, at least to my experience,
>nothing which can be worked on productively in a larger group.
The issue I want us to talk about is "How do we gain confidence
that 4.1 isn't going to be a disaster when we havn't tested it?"
I *also* want to talk about 4.2/5.0 and the future, but right
here and now our biggest problem is that we don't know if 4.1-R
can be released or not, and that should be our top priority.
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
More information about the varnish-dev