Re: Upgrading 9.0 -> 9.1 with SATA
From: David Wright (david_c_wright_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/10/04
- Next message: Marius Mosimann: "Re: Newbie Question, 9.1 Pro"
- Previous message: R S Prigan: "Re: System requirements?"
- In reply to: Chris: "Re: Upgrading 9.0 -> 9.1 with SATA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:20:26 +0200
Chris wrote:
>> If it is a production server, then you shouldn't be doing an upgrade of
> such
>> magnitude directly on it! You should be doing a parallel test machine,
>> installing and making sure all services are up and running correctly,
>> that everything configures correctly under the new version of the OS (and
>> the new versions of the servers and applications that are installed -
>> Samba 3 for example has new parameters and has obsoleted others in the
>> config file).
>>
>> Once everything is tested and signed off, then you can do the upgrade on
> the
>> live server and copy the settings across from the test server and restore
>> the user data from the pre-upgrade backup.
>>
>
> Your point is well-taken, but it's not an option. I only own one server.
>
> 9.0 -> 9.1 is, theoretically, a point release. All I'm looking for is some
> bug fixes, not some grand new features. There's no reason this upgrade
> should be a big production.
It isn't a point release though, not for the Kernel at any rate, that goes
from a 2.4 to a 2.6, which is a very different architecture when it comes
to hardware support. It should provide better support, but like the SATA
case has shown, it has changed very much here, it has gone from supporting
it under emulation to supporting it natively, which means, basically,
reinstalling the OS from scratch, otherwise you will most likely end up
with problems.
> The sites on the box are important, but nobody dies if they go down. They
> can afford to be down for a few hours, but not for a few days.
>
> Plus, I've done a substantial amount of configuring on the old box, all of
> which would have to be recreated on the new one. The odds that I would
> mess something up are very high, and I may not discover it until something
> failed later. The truth is, upgrading the existing box is much more likely
> to be problem-free than building a new one.
See above, you really would be better off migrating your existing settings
to a test environment, even if it is just a spare desktop PC and checking
that everything works like you expect it to. There are new versions of
Apache, Samba etc. to take into account as well, which have different
configuration options.
There have also been some issues with PHP not working properly with Apache
out of the box or with one of the YOU update versions. If you uses Apache 2
and PHP, then you owe it to yourself to test the system first before going
live...
> So I've got find a way to make this work.
>
> If I edit fstab, and do a search for other occurences of hdg, hde, etc. in
> other config files, is it likely to work?
Theoretically, but if the upgrade goes awry, you have no fall back
position... If you must do a live upgrade, please, please ensure you do a
complete system backup before you start, just in case.
I know trying to do a 9.0 to 9.1 upgrade on my system trashed it and I had
to start over with a clean install anyway...
Dave
- Next message: Marius Mosimann: "Re: Newbie Question, 9.1 Pro"
- Previous message: R S Prigan: "Re: System requirements?"
- In reply to: Chris: "Re: Upgrading 9.0 -> 9.1 with SATA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
