[olug] Installing multiple linux distros...

[Jay Swackhamer]

It is a major hassle, when the applications/databases are supposed to  
be up 24/7/365 and coordinating several projects to agree to the same  
downtime is sometimes not possible.

Oracle cluster,
# uptime
  15:01:35 up 388 days, 11:05,  3 users,  load average: 2.43, 2.08, 1.70

-- 
Jay Swackhamer
Reboot The User
402-933-6449
http://www.reboottheuser.com
http://www.cafepress.com/rtu
http://stores.ebay.com/RebootTheUser
http://www.hotr.com


Quoting "T. J. Brumfield" <enderandrew at gmail.com>:

> Yes, but they only patch what they see as security issues as opposed
> to all bugs.
>
> As far as migration goes, we're talking minor updates to packages. The
> nice thing about Linux is that you can patch without a full reboot.
> Most shops automatically account for patching all Windows boxes are
> rebooting them once a month. Yet the idea of trying to update a Linux
> box once every six months is considered a major hassle.
>
> -- T. J. Brumfield
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 2:41 PM, adunlop<techworld.mail at gmail.com> wrote:
>> RHEL patches security issues rather quickly.  CentOS does as well from
>> what I've seen.  The advantage to having older software is that you
>> have to update less often.  Fedora may have a 12 month lifespan, but
>> with RHEL you have 7 years.  Migrating production servers is a task
>> best done at a more leisurely pace than annually :)
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>> On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:14 PM, T. J. Brumfield wrote:
>>
>>>> CentOS is the primary distro I use.  Aside from a glitchy network
>>>> driver for the Realtek 8138/8139 integrated NIC on the AMD SB700/770
>>>> chipsets I've not had to mess with drivers at all.  That driver
>>>> really
>>>> isn't CentOS's fault either.  It does run behind on kernel versions
>>>> but hey, it's a server distro, stability and long-life wins.  You're
>>>> always free to roll your own :)
>>>>
>>>> Aaron
>>>
>>> There are those that prefer old versions because they feel old
>>> versions are inherently more stable. Others prefer bleeding edge
>>> because they feel that they will have the most features, and the
>>> latest fixes. Honestly, I'm not sure there is a huge difference in
>>> stability between the two unless package maintainers make the effort
>>> to backport fixes without backporting new features. There are people
>>> who maintain older kernel lines for exactly that reason, but overall
>>> even new kernel releases are pretty stable.
>>>
>>> Most major distros and projects within the Linux-verse implement a
>>> feature-freeze before releasing to focus on fixing bugs without adding
>>> any features. I'm not sure that intentionally running old versions
>>> gives you any benefits.
>>>
>>> But to each their own. The beauty of Linux is that you're afforded
>>> that choice to do as you please.
>>>
>>> -- T. J. Brumfield
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OLUG mailing list
>>> OLUG at olug.org
>>> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OLUG mailing list
>> OLUG at olug.org
>> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>