R-Elists schrieb:
>> Specific arguments I can think of would be:
>> - Hard/Impossible to find replacement hardware
>> - Lack of support for both H/W and S/W
>> - Possibly unable to run current versions of CentOS
>> - Higher probability of hardware failures over time
>> - Performance bottlenecks
>>
>> Any other thoughts?
>>
>> Shawn
>>
>> __
>>
>
> Shawn,
>
> i dont think you mentioned the specific hardware involved...
>
> i.e. brand and model number and config
>
> it makes a difference in how we would approach it...
>
> mainly because we have some 10 year old and older hardware that has been
> running rock solid it's entire life and we expect several more years out of
> some of it...
>
> we keep hot and cold spares of everything though...
>
> to be semi generic, i am talking about business / industrial rackmount
> Compaq & HP servers, and some telco quality Cisco of course...
>
> :-)
>
> please do share...
>
> - rh
>
Yeah, if it's an IBM mainframe, I'd give it another 10 years, easily.
Spareparts will probably still be available long after my death.
But don't look at the maintenance-bill you get from IBM. At least not
before breakfast.
It's not for the faint-hearted or those with a weak stomach....
;-)
Rainer
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
