On 12/9/20 04:46, Andrea Biscuola wrote:
IMHO, if you based the most critical part of your infrastructure on CentOS, you did it wrong. [...] We also just switched to CentOS 8 from CentOS 6 spending around 6 months of work in doing so, but the most important part of our infrastructure is on paid RHEL licenses (i.e. hypervisors).
Back in the Before Times and RHEL 7 was at .1 or .2 I had a persistent kernel oops on a set of RHEL7 hypervisors. Since we had fairly well tricked out RHEL support licenses I opened a ticket and within a couple of weeks I had confirmation that yep, there was a known issue, and there was a fix entering testing. I asked for access to the fixed kernel. I was told no. I asked if there was a particular kernel version I could deploy temporarily until the fix was released. Silence. I asked for a bug ID so I could maybe use that to figure out what kernel I could deploy until RH released the fix. Silence. Meanwhile hypervisors are oopsing on me because the project didn't want to deviate from the vendor baseline. Then I learned about Centos Plus. I reprovisioned a machine, picked a Plus kernel, and happy sailing. The project decided functionality was superior to arbitrary compliance in this case. Rebuilt the rest of that rack to CentOS 7 and never looked back. Or bothered renewing as many and that level of support because the one time I really could have used it it was effectively denied. Sometimes basing the most critical part of your infrastructure on CentOS was the only way forward. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
