redhat 9 experience ?

jason andrade jason at rtfmconsult.com
Sat Aug 16 18:18:00 CDT 2003


On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 ahorn at deorth.org wrote:

> I wondered how many on the list had deployed redhat9 in a production
> environment and if they had any positive or negative experiences about
> that?

i've got some RH9 deployed.. it's been a reasonably positive experience
so far [1].  our mantra had been to stick with RH7.3 until we could make
a decision on RHEL, RHCL or a replacement [2].  we bit the bullet and
started deploying RH9 a few months ago to see how it would behave after
some initial testing.. i would probably have called it RH 7.3.2 since it
seems just about as stable.. with some nice minor improvements and bug
fixes, plus the knowledge that RH will have patches for it until sometime
in mid 2004, unlike RH7.3 which goes EOPL (end of patch life (?)) in Dec
2003.  By then we should have a decision on RHEL [3]

keeping in mind this is a 'production server' type environment so i don't
see any of the nice gui differences between 7.3 and 9 in the installer.. or
new gui apps, desktop etc.  just server stuff and server tools.. all i
really care about is stability and performance..

regards,

-jason


[1] there is still some kernel issue which i can't get any traction on
    and has been quite serious for us.  i am wondering if it may be
    fixed in RHEL but it may lead us to abandon RH altogether if it
    can't be addressed.  i am of course speaking of the infamous stack
    traces that happen with the do_irq stuff.  this started happening
    frequently sometime after 2.4.18-27.7.x and i have been unable to
    build a custom kernel without it eventually crashing the machine.

    more seriously it now happens in binary kernels supplied by redhat
    (didn't use to) which is giving me pause.  of course it only seems
    to happen with very high network load - we are doing close to 100Mbit
    throughput on servers 24/7..  if you don't actually _do_ anything
    with your servers you should be fine :-)

[2] FreeBSD is the most likely alternative

[3] RHEL 2.1 is basically RH7.2.  RHEL 3 (no idea when it comes out, if
    you are interested try the "taroon - 2.95.X" beta which is available
    for download from a nearby redhat mirror) appears much newer and
    i would guess is the enterprise split from the RH8/9/10 tree as it
    appears to have a lot more new stuff in it.  the much newer kernel
    should help a lot of things as well e.g 1Tbyte disks are not handled
    well in RH2.1 but are seen fine in RH9 and taroon..




More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list