(Tiny)KVM and upgrading from 9.0

[TjPhysicist]

I currently have a server hosted with ramhost (on a KVM) that runs 9.0-RELEASE as of now. However, I am told 9.1 (and likely 9.2 as well) is severely broken under KVM (in fact ramhost have NOT updated their mountable ISO's to 9.1-RELEASE or 9.2-RELEASE citing this very concern). So, what (if anything) do I upgrade to? This is especially concerning since 9.0-RELEASE has long reached its end of life.

I have a few options here: I could source compile -STABLE, and just keep following it, or somehow go back to the 8.0 line and keep following THAT via binary upgrades(though methinks that there will be a LOT of random issues with a downgrade like that, especially with some ports), or follow -CURRENT forever.

Any suggestions? I'm sure I'm not the only one running FreeBSD on a KVM, any of you who are doing so have any suggestions? This is also a general question about best practice regarding upgrades on servers (note: this is a personal site, so no production level server obviously).

 

[ShelLuser]

My hosting provider, TransIP, also uses KVM and quite frankly I have a hard time wondering how RamHost could come to such a conclusion. Because I've been running FreeBSD 9.1 since February this year and have recently upgraded to version 9.2 without any issues. These versions are most certainly not "severely broken", that's utter nonsense.

Just for context: here is a list of all the operating systems which TransIP currently provides for their VPS environments. As you can see it mentions FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE. And here you can read about their commitment to KVM.

What has been an issue though is the if_vtnet driver. According to the documentation it had a flaw with sending TSO frames without the proper flags set. As such this feature is turned off in sysctl.conf:

net.inet.tcp.tso=0

But that has more to do with the so called "VirtIO drivers" than FreeBSD as a whole. This setting has been implemented by TransIP themselves and their routers also make sure that it is being enforced.

I'm a little baffled that a hosting provider would make such weird comments about FreeBSD.

Alas, bottom line; there shouldn't be anything stopping you from running FreeBSD 9.2 (or 9.1) on a KVM environment. Perhaps the so called TSO issue, but if a hosting provider like TransIP can identify and nullify that bug then surely other hosting providers should be able to do the same?

 

[TjPhysicist]

My hosting provider, TransIP, also uses KVM and quite frankly I have a hard time wondering how RamHost could come to such a conclusion. Because I've been running FreeBSD 9.1 since February this year and have recently upgraded to version 9.2 without any issues. These versions are most certainly not "severely broken", that's utter nonsense.

Just for context: here is a list of all the operating systems which TransIP currently provides for their VPS environments. As you can see it mentions FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE. And here you can read about their commitment to KVM.

What has been an issue though is the if_vtnet driver. According to the documentation it had a flaw with sending TSO frames without the proper flags set. As such this feature is turned off in sysctl.conf:

net.inet.tcp.tso=0

But that has more to do with the so called "VirtIO drivers" than FreeBSD as a whole. This setting has been implemented by TransIP themselves and their routers also make sure that it is being enforced.

I'm a little baffled that a hosting provider would make such weird comments about FreeBSD.

Alas, bottom line; there shouldn't be anything stopping you from running FreeBSD 9.2 (or 9.1) on a KVM environment. Perhaps the so called TSO issue, but if a hosting provider like TransIP can identify and nullify that bug then surely other hosting providers should be able to do the same?

Thanks, I just didn't want to end up in a scenario where I cannot boot into KVM after I upgraded. To be fair, Ramhost themselves just used the words "due to a known compatibility issue with KVM", though a bit of quick googleing got me more than a little concerned regarding this possibility. I have pointed them over here, since other's have told me about using 9.1 with KVM without issues, but one other person on here mentioned they had issues with trying to freebsd-update to 9.1 or 9.2 on tinyKVM and having errors. Let's hope this gets resolved without me having to bump down to 8.X line, I have a vague feeling it won't be a pleasant experience.

UPDATE ramhost just replied back the they VERY recently (a day, maybe 2 ago perhaps) discovered that they issue was an intermittent one and have since then moved to 9.2. Though with a big fat warning "we have not been able to determine what the intermittent issue with FreeBSD 9 was. There is a chance your system may break from upgrading" I really had no way of knowing since my OS-Reload menu still has no 9.2 image and there was nothing in their news/forum about this. Not sure If I should upgrade or not...