Roger Heflin wrote:
I can't recall ever being in a position of "having to bring in new
hardware". What scenario forces this issue on you? I haven't noticed
a shortage of vendors who will sell RHEL supported boxes. But it
sounds like you have an interesting job...
More cpu power needed to do the job. And the new boxes aren't
officially RHEL supported (and sometimes won't even boot with the latest
update-but will work with the latest fedora/kernel.org).
Something faster than IBM could sell you?
I had a subset
of machines (about 250 machines) all of which had reached about 500+
days of uptime (the uptime counter rolled over)
Wasn't that fixed circa RH8? I had some 7.3 machines roll over twice.
The issue with all OSes is that no one tests enough to catch
these high MTBF issues, and in a big environment a machine crashing 1x
per every 1000 days of uptime, comes to 1 machine a day crashing because
of software, and typically the enterprise OSes aren't even close to that
level, and while fedora is worse, it is just not that much worse.
I don't think RH7.3 with its final updates or Centos3.x (where x>1) had
anything approaching a software crash per 1000 days - at least not in
the base system and common services. I mostly skipped the 4.x series
because I didn't trust the early 2.6 kernels at all, but 5.1 seems solid.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
