-
Important Announcement for the TrueNAS Community.
The TrueNAS Community has now been moved. This forum will now become READ-ONLY for historical purposes. Please feel free to join us on the new TrueNAS Community Forums
STABLE train? Really?
- Thread starter BossyBear
- Start date
- Status
zambanini
Patron
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2013
- Messages
- 479
yeah, the intenion with faster updates was nice. but it was forseeable, that without real testing from ixsystems, we as the freenas users are the monkeys for truenas. jkh and the 'others' want to ease it...since you always can go back to an older 9.3 env from the boot enviroment. anyway, after each update you have to test everything, otherwise you will be surprised ,)
you are not allone with this problem. there were similar issues with updates in 9.2 because of the lack of testing. now with 9.3 you even do not have a 'golden' 9.3 or call it 9.3.1 to go to a fixed tested state.
I know many users myself, you will not update to 9.3 until this nightmare will be solved.
edit2:
I do not think FN is crap. otherwise I would not use it.
it makes things easy, iscsi works really great. the management of the updates is the only **** in the ***.
@jkh help :)
you are not allone with this problem. there were similar issues with updates in 9.2 because of the lack of testing. now with 9.3 you even do not have a 'golden' 9.3 or call it 9.3.1 to go to a fixed tested state.
I know many users myself, you will not update to 9.3 until this nightmare will be solved.
edit2:
I do not think FN is crap. otherwise I would not use it.
it makes things easy, iscsi works really great. the management of the updates is the only **** in the ***.
@jkh help :)
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 10,994
I started a thread about all these frequent updates and the lack of adequate testing and I guess it fell on deaf ears of iXsystems, but I do like the idea of a rapid quick fix capability but I feel they have taken it too far, too many changes in a very short period of time and it's easy to break something by accident. I also do not think FreeNAS is crap, I like it quite a bit myself and will continue to use it.
The good thing is you can roll back to the previous version to recover your system operation. Did you submit a bug report? If not, you should or the next time you upgrade you might find yourself in the same situation. Also, I don't recommend upgrading simply for the same of upgrading. Evaluate the changelog (when it starts working again) to see if there is something you must have, otherwise if it's working fine, leave it alone. Yes, I upgrade periodically (I skip a change here and there) and after I review the changelog but I also am a tester and will report any issues, even the minor ones.
Bidule0hm
Server Electronics Sorcerer
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 3,710
My 2 cents:
I think the updates are better than the old system, but there far too many of them per unit of time. You don't have the time to apply the last update that there already is another one...
One update per one or two weeks would be more than enough ;)
I think the updates are better than the old system, but there far too many of them per unit of time. You don't have the time to apply the last update that there already is another one...
One update per one or two weeks would be more than enough ;)
BigDave
FreeNAS Enthusiast
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2013
- Messages
- 2,479
Unless of course you are having an issue that borks your system, in which case
the masses would be screaming for a fix RIGHT NOW!:p
We have all been on the other end of waiting for a fix...
I will not complain about support that keeps up on an almost daily basis.
I have nothing but good things to say...
Last edited:
BossyBear
Dabbler
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2013
- Messages
- 48
I mean, I really like my FreeNAS system. But I'm astounded every time I read the release notes in the update panel. So many fixes for typographical errors in python files, missing symlinks, and the root of my last update is not that it was a bad release, it's that it didn't update properly. I had to reboot into an older build and it won't even let me remove the most recent failed update. So it may be a good build if I could get the damn thing to stick!
The only reason I do updates as often as they come out is because I'm hoping one of them will calm my console down. Ever since 9.3 came out I'm getting smbd errors about starting up again and again. I know the PC and the java app that is spawning these errors but I don't know why an agent would cause Samba to restart at all.
No more "STABLE" updates for me until a point release to 9.3.
Frustrated...
The only reason I do updates as often as they come out is because I'm hoping one of them will calm my console down. Ever since 9.3 came out I'm getting smbd errors about starting up again and again. I know the PC and the java app that is spawning these errors but I don't know why an agent would cause Samba to restart at all.
No more "STABLE" updates for me until a point release to 9.3.
Frustrated...
- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 10,994
I don't know if that will happen because we now have the new distribution system for updates. I was thinking the next thing out would be version 10, well I hope it's the next thing out.
I like the updates system. You can always test them if necessary on another machine. Or you can find a nice, stable one and make a note of it so you can go back to it. Strangely, nearly every update so far has had one or another little thing that I quite liked having quickly.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2014
- Messages
- 1,111
Once the change log is fixed I don't see a problem skipping updates that don't address a problem you're having.
I have to say it's hard to keep my ARC/L2ARC warmed up with all these reboots. Thankfully I use freeNAS as a backup target for the most part. If my VMWare cluster was running on it I'd be pulling my hair out.
I have to say it's hard to keep my ARC/L2ARC warmed up with all these reboots. Thankfully I use freeNAS as a backup target for the most part. If my VMWare cluster was running on it I'd be pulling my hair out.
Last edited:
Glorious1
Guru
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2014
- Messages
- 1,211
If you feel that way, roll back to a version that worked for you and just don't update.
Read the change notices and don't update unless there's a fix you need. Of course I do recognize that an update may include a new bug in addition to a fix you need.
Not a viable option once you consider security updates.
This is one of the things Ubuntu kind of got right: have a rock-steady "long term support" release that only gets important security updates, a "mostly stable" release (the "9.3-STABLE" train), and a development release (the "9.3-Nightlies" train). Those using FreeNAS in a production environment can ride the LTS train, while everyday home users and those exercising the "latest and greatest" (read: frequently updated) features can ride the STABLE train. Realistically only developers and those trying to resolve specific issues should be riding the Nightly trains.
Not to slam the dev team as they are doing an awesome job, but I would have to agree here.
Would love to just get security updates plus critical patches (e.g. data corruption, broken kernel, etc...) for the STABLE train. How can a train be considered STABLE if the weekly updates "may include a new bug"?
Would love to just get security updates plus critical patches (e.g. data corruption, broken kernel, etc...) for the STABLE train. How can a train be considered STABLE if the weekly updates "may include a new bug"?
airflow
Contributor
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Messages
- 111
I like the new update-system. It makes managing updates easy, fast, and easily roll-backable.
Users who don't want to implement each of the (now more frequent) updates are encouraged to not apply each of them - just when there is a compelling reason to do so. That's what the change-logs are for. Just keep in mind that no matter how the updates are delivered to the end-user, development of the project is happening constantly. Now you have the chance to choose whether you immediately profit from this or not.
I also check the change-log before doing that. I apply most updates, because I don't bother and I like to actively observe the progress of the FN-project. I also report bugs when I spot them. My experience is that there is very good response of development, and most bugs are fixed fast.
Users who don't want to implement each of the (now more frequent) updates are encouraged to not apply each of them - just when there is a compelling reason to do so. That's what the change-logs are for. Just keep in mind that no matter how the updates are delivered to the end-user, development of the project is happening constantly. Now you have the chance to choose whether you immediately profit from this or not.
I also check the change-log before doing that. I apply most updates, because I don't bother and I like to actively observe the progress of the FN-project. I also report bugs when I spot them. My experience is that there is very good response of development, and most bugs are fixed fast.
Well, guess I'll see you in FreeNAS 10 then. ;)
Yeah.. I like rolling versions in principle, but unfortunately it's usually more fun for developers to work on new functionality than on making stuff that "mostly works" even more stable, especially when the issues are rare or hard to debug. I don't blame them for this, just making an observation :p.My fear (which is too strong a word, but "concern" isn't quite right either) is that FreeNAS 10 will come out and FreeNAS 9.3-STABLE will basically be left in whatever state it's in at release.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
