Follow upgrade game or wait?

[alexg]

Now that 9.2.1.4 is out and with planned automated upgrade feature in 9.2.2, I wonder "do you jump on upgrades" or wait? If wait, how long?

My apologies if this was already discussed.

 

[9C1 Newbee]

I am sure other guys will jump on here who know WAY more than I and give you a response. I have a feeling it will NOT be a clear cut answer. I just upgraded from 8.3. to 9.2.1.4. For use as my home media server, I have no regrets in the few days I have ran it. Not sure the differences between .3 to .4. What are you looking to gain? I don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading. But that's just me.

 

[alexg]

I was on 9.2 originally and made a mistake upgrading to 9.2.1. Then decided to stick with it through all the issues. I'm now on 9.2.1.3 and still having strange CIFS permission issues, but at least I know how to work around them. I learn from my mistake and not sure if I want to take the risk of trying 9.2.1.4. I'm planning to monitor the forum for few weeks before I take the plunge on 9.2.1.4

 

[9C1 Newbee]

That is probably the best approach. I have had a few minor issues with the plugins and the jails. Seems Freenas decided to put the jail in an area where I didn't want it. My solution was to offline the pool I didn't want the jail. It forced it to go the the pool I selected. I also had an issue with the scrub on the array taking 3x longer. It completed without issue. Other than that, it has been nice. One thing to mention. While creating new pools with the new version, using lz4 compression is default. The collective verdict is still out if it should be used most the time as it being default would suggest. More on that here...

http://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/lz4-compression-enabled-by-default.20260/#post-116490

 

[diedrichg]

I just upgraded from 8.3. to 9.2.1.4.

Did you upgrade your ZFS pool to the new ZFS version ("Upgrading a ZFS Pool" paragraph in the Docs)?

 

[warri]

I usually upgrade to the newest RELEASE versions about one to two weeks after they are released.

But in my home scenario I don't use a any of the new features introduced since 9.1.x: no jails, no ZFS feature flags (still on v28), no encryption whatsoever. Since my server currently is in a remote location, I don't even use CIFS anymore. The only service running on my NAS is SSH (for SFTP) and SMART, and that never failed me ;)

 

[cyberjock]

I'm still on 9.2.0 and v28 zpool.

I'm very conservative about upgrading. It's a tradeoff between having new problems, fixing old problems, and having security vulnerabilities related to using outdated versions.

9.2.1.x has been a nightmare for many users. While I could probably solve some of the problems on my own, I'd expect most users to not be willing to spend the time or have the experience to do it on their own. I haven't upgraded because I have no serious need to have 9.2.1.x features and I really don't want to spend the time trying to fix any problems.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it! (security vulnerabilities not withstanding of course)

 

[alexg]

Did you upgrade your ZFS pool to the new ZFS version ("Upgrading a ZFS Pool" paragraph in the Docs)?

Unfortunately, I did. But I'm learning from my mistakes and that won't happen again.

 

[9C1 Newbee]

I did not upgrade. I am on v28 as well. I will hold off until I am sure I won't wanna downgrade.

 

[solarisguy]

My advice to novices?

• Learn FreeNAS while testing your hardware and deployment procedures using the currently available RELEASE.
• Document all the steps.
• When ready, check whether there is a newer version, if yes, then grab it.
• Deploy the latest available RELEASE on a clean system (do not upgrade FreeNAS).
• If anything is not working as you had seen it, go back and deploy the version you did your tests on.

My advice to veterans? You are a veteran, since you have your own ways.

My ramblings on the related topics are below the divider. Read at your own risk
=====================================================
Non-IT users tend to go 100% for the latest/current RELEASE. So each of the releases should be made with an intention to be more stable than the previous one.

Those with the IT experience do some checks first, whether:

• there are development versions (and FreeNAS has alpha, beta and sometimes release candidate)
• there is a reasonable plan for the future (and FreeNAS has a plan for a 9.2.2)
• there exist a support community with both announcements and discussion about them

Unless an IT person has some specific needs (in my estimate that would be less than 10%, you know who you are ;)) they go for the current RELEASE, too. Reasons are many. However, if one is not a masochist with plenty of spare time, then not only a pleasure, but also the greatest benefits are obtainable when working with a version that has less, not more, bugs.

There are insane people everywhere, including IT..., but unless one is an IT manager, then one goes for the latest RELEASE to get less problems, and not more. Mistakes/bugs/problems with the upstream code¹,² do happen. So they are getting fixed... And I hope that 9.2.1.5 will be another step in that direction. With 9.2.1.6 and next ones to follow. I tested that for my very limited home use needs current RELEASEs (yes, the final „s”! :D) are acceptable. However, if any project announces features that are not fully available in the current version that is unacceptable! Especially if there is no announcement (that is a prominent warning in the release notes), that the situation is only a temporary one and going to be fixed very soon. I am talking here about no warning about https://bugs.freenas.org/issues/4628 in release notes for 9.2.1.4 and for that release that never was...


¹ FreeNAS is on the current Netatalk 3.1.1, while even Wikipedia only knows about 3.1.0 :)

² FreeNAS is on Samba 4.1.6, with 4.1.7 released only a week ago; but 4.1.7 has plenty of bug fixes...

 

[Jeroma11]

I'm agree with you :)

 

[jkh]

¹ FreeNAS is on the current Netatalk 3.1.1, while even Wikipedia only knows about 3.1.0 :)

² FreeNAS is on Samba 4.1.6, with 4.1.7 released only a week ago; but 4.1.7 has plenty of bug fixes...

1. Wikipedia is out of date with the project. You should always see the project's own page for the most definitive information since 3.1.1 has been out and prominently displayed on the Netatalk project page for awhile now. Wikipedia, despite rumors to the contrary, is not the source of all truth on the Internet. :)

2. 4.1.7 is now in 9.2.1-BRANCH and, if you heeded the call for BETA testers sent out in the announcement forum yesterday, you're already running it. :)

All decisions with respect to upgrades are always risk/reward decisions. Always, and it doesn't matter if you're talking about a new version of Windows, where presumably a QA department containing thousands of people tested it before it ever went out the door, or a new version of FreeNAS (which has substantially smaller QA but is trying to get better).

You'll also see in every (recent) release of FreeNAS a MANIFEST file. This is not there by accident. It contains a list of all the git repositories (mirrored on github) that went into building FreeNAS, and which specific git hashes identify the branch / last commit that went into that repo. That is far more definitive than anything you might ever read here, since the code doesn't lie!

- Jordan

 

[alexg]

I'm staying put on 9.2.1.3 for now with some patches (autorepl.py, samba kernel notify, and maybe one other). Have to restart CIFS occasionally, but at least it is working for me and stable enough. I've spent too much time on getting to this level and will wait to see what happens with 9.2.1.6 before I take next jump.

 

[joeschmuck]

I have 9.2.1.3 working perfectly and do not plan to make any changes for a while, maybe not until 9.2.2 comes out (or 3 months later). Unfortunately I am no longer at V28 but I doubt I'll have to move backwards and all my important data is backed up so I could recreate a V28 pool if needed. We will see in Oct 2015 when my drives will start reaching a time of replacement. And to be fair, I do have a test machine which I will install the latest FreeNAS software and test it on my own for a while and I use a VM of it as well, again for testing purposes. These things help me evaluate if I should take the next plunge. If you are not into all this testing then I'd recommend waiting 3 months to see what early adopters find out and if all looks good, take the plunge yourself if you want to. But if you have a closed system at home, as Cyberjock said, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Now it's time to go mow the lawn before it rains again.