Sorry, my mistake, I read the list title as "linux-cluster" as opposed to "redhat-linux-server-3.0-cluster".
As I'm no longer a RH user, and now I know, I'll unsubscribe.
Thanks for the clarification.
Regards,
Gareth.
On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 17:37 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 16:46, Gareth Bult wrote:RHEL is using a 2.4 kernel because that is what they chose to make stable. You are on a RedHat mailing list discussing a RedHat product. Thousands of customers running Oracle on RHEL 3 AS are quite happy that RedHat is using a 2.4.21 kernel (as an example). They are also happy that RedHat is making GFS 6.0 available for the RHEL 3 product line.Hi, >What I think everyone is saying ... not implying, but saying... is this. >RHEL is stable (if you use the supported kernel), and GFS 6.0 for RHEL >is stable. If you are using anything else, it is not stable. Why is >that so hard to understand? Perhaps because for non-redhat users, 2.4 is considered "old hat" and they can't understand why Redhat is *still* using 2.4 (?!)Use whatever you want ... only don't expect software that someone says is unstable to be stable. IF you want a stable GFS from RedHat ... use RHEL and GFS 6. If you want to use another distro and another GFS ... great ... just don't complain that it is not stable.>The 2.6 Kernel is stable ... however, it is not stable (or supported) on >RHEL ... and the code GFS code for the 2.6 kernel is not recommended for >use on a production machine with a 2.6 kernel. Use the GFS code for the >2.6 kernel on a production machine at your own risk. Urm, I guess I don't "have" to use 2.6, but it would be "really" painful for me not to use 2.6 .. for way more reasons than I want to list here.Again ... you are the person who chooses what technology you deploy ... but RedHat is going to put out stable products for their supported RHEL. If you can make it work on a different distro with a different kernel, great.>At least that is what I got out of the posts ... maybe I'm wrong though Sure, thought you should appreciate that for people who've been off 2.4 and in production on 2.6 for a long time, comments like "you should be using 2.4" are a little redundant.Regards, Gareth. Johnny Hughes HughesJR.com <http://www.hughesjr.com>Johnny Hughes
|
-- Gareth Bult <Gareth@xxxxxxxxxx> |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
