On 7/24/06, Chris Mauritz chrism@imntv.com wrote:
Jim Perrin wrote:
On 7/24/06, Eduardo Grosclaude eduardo.grosclaude@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, I want to compare CentOS to Fedora and other distros on a stability/network-dependance basis. Where should I look for some published statistics on updates? I mean probably megabytes per week (or whichever units, of published updates over time), per distro. Thank you in advance
http://www.linux-magazine.com/issue/65/CentOS_4.2.pdf http://www.redhat.com/rhel/migrate/whichlinux/ (CentOS is built from the freely available RHEL source rpms, so arguements for RHEL on this page also apply to CentOS, except for support and pricetag.)
I have a number of CentOS machines that have been up 24/7 in datacenter environments for years and were only rebooted on occasion as a result of security-related kernel upgrades (which would affect any linux distro). I can't recall EVER having uptime or network-related issues on ANY live CentOS server that wasn't the direct result of a hardware failure. It just works...and works...and works. :) The key is to beat up on any new hardware in a test environment first to make sure that you don't have any incompatible hardware bits (which hasn't bitten me often).
Thank you for your point, on which I wholly agree, but I was taking
"stability" as "a measure of velocity in change" of a system's components-- here reflected in a shorter or longer life cycle for each version. Please correct me if I am wrong, I may be misusing the word (I am heading right to Wikipedia in a minute! :) ). We all want CentOS as a server system because of its "stability" which -at least for me- means few, controlled changes over an extended lifetime. As to the network-dependance problem, I was thinking of the "gee, I will really need a bandwidth here to cope with updates" feeling suggested, for instance, by Fedora.