Hi all,
I would like to first preface this e-mail by saying if this topic has been covered already, could someone point me to the month of the discussion and I will gladly read it.
We have been using RHEL 3 / 4 in our environment and I am very happy and satisfied with the stability of the OS. Now with the new technologies incorporated into RHEL5, specifically Virtualization, Clustering, and Storage, and the costs associated with them, I was wondering how similar CentOS and RHEL 5 were.
It is my understanding that CentOS is RHEL 5 with the RedHat icons removed but the functionality of the packages is the same. In addition, updates may come a day or two later than RHEL 5.
My boss is a little concerned about the differences since we host production servers that require minimal downtime.
Any thoughts and opinions are very welcome.
Thank you for your input.
Denise Lopez
UCLA - Center for Digital Humanities
Network Services
Linux Systems Engineer
337 Charles E. Young Drive East
PPB 1020
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1499
310/206-8216
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 03:25:32PM -0800, Lopez, Denise wrote:
We have been using RHEL 3 / 4 in our environment and I am very happy and satisfied with the stability of the OS. Now with the new technologies incorporated into RHEL5, specifically Virtualization, Clustering, and Storage, and the costs associated with them, I was wondering how similar CentOS and RHEL 5 were.
They should be identical.
It is my understanding that CentOS is RHEL 5 with the RedHat icons removed but the functionality of the packages is the same. In addition, updates may come a day or two later than RHEL 5.
Correct. In addition, I think the CentOS kernels are basically the "AS" kernels, and obviously there is no activation key, nor will you be able to use RHN for errata notification, etc.
My boss is a little concerned about the differences since we host production servers that require minimal downtime.
We typically continue to use RHEL for production stuff, and CentOS for anything non-critical. Not that CentOS wouldn't make a solid production server.
Ray
From: Ray Van Dolson On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 03:25:32PM -0800, Lopez, Denise wrote:
My boss is a little concerned about the differences since
we host production
servers that require minimal downtime.
We typically continue to use RHEL for production stuff, and CentOS for anything non-critical. Not that CentOS wouldn't make a solid production server.
We use centos for "all" servers which do not "require" a support plan from Red Hat. I wonder what would happen if we purchased a support license for a centos box after the fact?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Sr. Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 - - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, purge the message from your system and notify the sender immediately. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited.
on 12/6/2007 3:25 PM Lopez, Denise spake the following:
Hi all,
I would like to first preface this e-mail by saying if this topic has been covered already, could someone point me to the month of the discussion and I will gladly read it.
We have been using RHEL 3 / 4 in our environment and I am very happy and satisfied with the stability of the OS. Now with the new technologies incorporated into RHEL5, specifically Virtualization, Clustering, and Storage, and the costs associated with them, I was wondering how similar CentOS and RHEL 5 were.
It is my understanding that CentOS is RHEL 5 with the RedHat icons removed but the functionality of the packages is the same. In addition, updates may come a day or two later than RHEL 5.
My boss is a little concerned about the differences since we host production servers that require minimal downtime.
Any thoughts and opinions are very welcome.
The choice comes down to this; If you require to have a support contract, and a live person on the other end of the telephone when you have problems -- Use RedHat's offering and pay the support.
If you are willing to test things on non-production servers, and use public resources to work through problems -- Use CentOS. The money you save on support costs will more than offset the cost of a few test systems to run updates through.
CentOS uses the same system and source files that RHEL uses, and it is probably the distribution that is closest to the RHEL offering -- sometimes too close, because if it is broken on RedHat, it will probably be broken on CentOS also. The CentOS maintainers also have had success finding bugs and proposing fixes to the RHEL bug system, which benefits all.
There are many commercial ventures running on CentOS and other similar works.
-
Jason Pyeron -
Lopez, Denise -
Ray Van Dolson -
Scott Silva