moving_from_rhel_to_centos_or_oracle_linux
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
moving_from_rhel_to_centos_or_oracle_linux [2020/05/22 17:33] – [Deciding on a Migration Target] sgriggs | moving_from_rhel_to_centos_or_oracle_linux [2020/05/27 17:05] – [Disclaimer] sgriggs | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | ==== Disclaimer ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | This article should be considered an opinionated editorial rather than any type of unbiased review. As a potential Red Hat refugee, it'll give you a lot of useful info. However, It's not supposed to be an impartial product review of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. The author' | ||
+ | |||
==== Moving from Redhat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to CentOS or Oracle Enterprise Linux ==== | ==== Moving from Redhat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to CentOS or Oracle Enterprise Linux ==== | ||
Line 10: | Line 14: | ||
- Red Hat requires every install have a subscription no matter what it's used for (dev, test, UAT, doesn' | - Red Hat requires every install have a subscription no matter what it's used for (dev, test, UAT, doesn' | ||
- | - Red Hat charges too much money for support. | + | - Many believe |
- | - Many of the useful and interesting features such as clustering, glusterfs, and virtualization have been broken into separate and expensive layered products. | + | - Many of the useful and interesting features such as clustering, glusterfs, and virtualization have been broken into separate and expensive layered products. |
- | - Red Hat's kernel patches require a reboot. Oracle Linux with ksplice doesn' | + | - Red Hat's kernel patches require a reboot. Oracle Linux with ksplice doesn' |
- | - Red Hat began the move to Lennart Pottering' | + | - Red Hat began the move to Lennart Pottering' |
- Some customers dislike Red Hat's update schedule, considering it to be overly frequent and aggressive. | - Some customers dislike Red Hat's update schedule, considering it to be overly frequent and aggressive. | ||
- | - Patches and even trivial packages aren't available unless your subscription is up to date. If not, you have a partially broken system. | + | - Patches and even trivial packages aren't available unless your subscription is up to date. If not, you have a partially broken system |
- | - Red Hat sales people | + | - Red Hat sales people |
- | - Red Hat training | + | - Some consider |
- | - Red Hat has been bought by IBM who has begun the process of strip mining the company and moving everything they can offshore. | + | - Red Hat has been bought by IBM who appears to have begun the process of strip mining the company and moving everything they can offshore. |
- | - Red Hat has a history of making poor technical choices. Example: they eschewed XFS and badmouthed | + | - Much criticism has been directed at Red Hat for making poor technical choices. Example: they eschewed XFS and badmouthed |
- | - RHEL follows Fedora and bad decisions in Fedora (of which therea are MANY) filter into RHEL eventually. | + | - RHEL follows Fedora and thus any bad decisions in Fedora (and most sysadmins would never choose a desktop distro like Fedora that has a long history |
- Red Hat isn't excited about BTRFS because the main developer works at Oracle. This could lead to more stagnation with Red Hat's already stagnant choices for filesystems. It's missing inline compression and deduplication without either BTRFS, ZFS-on-Linux, | - Red Hat isn't excited about BTRFS because the main developer works at Oracle. This could lead to more stagnation with Red Hat's already stagnant choices for filesystems. It's missing inline compression and deduplication without either BTRFS, ZFS-on-Linux, | ||
Line 56: | Line 60: | ||
- You want to move to a distro with a stable upgrade path. **Solution: | - You want to move to a distro with a stable upgrade path. **Solution: | ||
+ | ===== Benefits of Migration ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | At this point, it's very difficult to recommend Red Hat's products. There are a few exceptions where they have little or no competition, | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Smaller costs and lower cost growth for non-production environments. | ||
+ | - More stability and some insulation from Red Hat's historically poor decisions. | ||
+ | - Direct and permanent open Internet access to your basic package repos without hassle-servers (Uh, I mean caching servers ala Satellite & Spacewalk). | ||
+ | - More stable upgrade paths between major versions | ||
+ | - Access to advanced storage technology Red Hat doesn' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Personally, I'd also include "the satisfaction of telling your ultra-rude & aggressive salesperson that you no longer even run Redhat and please stop calling and threatening to audit or otherwise hassle you." In my personal case, I had around 600 RHEL machines convert to Oracle Enterprise Linux and Red Hat's only response was to threaten to do a forced software audit. Since we'd completely migrated every machine, it would have been a very short audit (as in "Would you like a cup of coffee before you go?", but they never actually did it (probably because they knew they had no leg to stand on). |
moving_from_rhel_to_centos_or_oracle_linux.txt · Last modified: 2020/06/03 16:55 by sgriggs