5 ms·

What's so good about RHEL/fedora vs debian or ubuntu server, say?

throwaway_xx9 11y ago
RHEL is good for large companies using linux, and product developers releasing commercial products for linux. It is required for support for certain products on linux, like Oracle. Also, RHEL is tested with various distributed filesystems, etc.
stephen_g 11y ago
Businesses love it because every major release is like Ubuntu's LTS releases. RHEL 4 (released in 2004) is still in extended support! I assume their support is good also, but I haven't used that. For me though, I have a bunch of servers running CentOS just because it's extremely solid and stable. The price you pay is that all your packages are a little old, but there are repos to get new software, so I can be on the newest Postgres and Node etc.
davidw 11y ago
I've always been a Debian/Ubuntu guy, but the Redhat folks are good people and have continued to dedicate a lot of resources to open source software, through thick and thin.
Ologn 11y ago
If you have hundreds of HP Proliant servers, all with the latest firmware patches and some level of support, and they all run a supported version of RHEL, with some level of support, and once a week a different machine crashes and dumps the kernel core - if you have RHEL (and HP) support, you have a way to escalate the issue. They have kernel programmers on staff who know what errors might be in the kernel code that talks to, say, host bus adapters. What does a normal corporation do in this circumstance if they are running Debian servers? Insofar as competition in this space, SLES has been popular in heterogenous environments (a lot of Windows servers). Canonical and Ubuntu are newer competitors on the scene. Companies have been using Red Hat for 20 years, they are pretty good at their jobs. Also, RHEL is a flagship but Red Hat sells support for other products like JBoss.
- rodgerd 11y ago
  > Also, RHEL is a flagship but Red Hat sells support for other products like JBoss. Last I checked they make about as much out of the JBoss-branded software as they do out of the platform stuff.
- jldugger 11y ago
  RHEL is 800 per server. If you have hundreds of these servers, you could pay a developer 80k to sit around learning kernel development on the offhand chance this comes up.
  - jon-wood 11y ago
    You could, but that's going to be the unloaded cost of a developer, add another 80k for benefits, tax, and everything else that comes with an employee. Even after that you've got a single kernel developer who might have learnt enough about the particular part of the kernel you're having problems with. Assuming its the kernel. Either that, or pay 80k to Red Hat, who have dozens of kernel developers one of whom probably knows about your issue, and if it turns out not to be the kernel probably have someone on staff that can investigate that as well. Worst case they know who to contact upstream to dig deeper into your issue.
  - rwmj 11y ago
    And the good thing is that companies are free to do that. Take Google, for example. They don't pay Red Hat because they have the code and they have amazingly smart kernel developers. But that's (surprisingly) still good for Red Hat, since Red Hat benefits from the contributions to the kernel that Google makes. It's good for all users of Linux.
mdnormy 11y ago
Speaking from business perspective: Same reason many people using SUSE Linux. - Support - SLA - Familiarity and continuity Sure business can pay for Debian enterprise support too, but its slightly different mindset when the whole ecosystem was made for business and enterprise.
rodgerd 11y ago
Can you point me to the Debian developer who will supply me a kernel patch, on my time line, for a feature I need? Can you point me to the Debian developer who will give me follow the sun support on a problem that could be with the J2EE container, the OS, the virt layer, or the hardware, and has support arrangements with the vendors of all those things so they don't just sit around finger pointing? Can you point me at the J2EE container Canonical supply?
- slgeorge 11y ago
  a. Yes, Canonical will provide you with a patch to an issue in Ubuntu the same as RedHat. b. Yes Canonical has follow the sun support for the "Main" section of Ubuntu. This includes the OS, the virt layer and the hardware along with relationships with the hardware vendors. c. No Ubuntu doesn't do enterprise J2EE The only open source solution is TomCat and as you know they won't co-operate with other distributions.
mindcrime 11y ago
What's so good about RHEL/fedora vs debian or ubuntu server, say? It's mostly just a matter of personal taste / preference. I use both Ubuntu and Fedora/CentOS and there's not really any huge functional differences. For a long time, years ago, people argued that apt was a much better tool than yum, which may have been true at one time. But for quite some time now I've found yum to be equal to or superior to apt. Of course, Fedora has moved to dnf now, where dnf is a more modern, drop-in replacement (mostly anyway) for yum. For me, I tend to stick mostly with the RH derived distros just out of familiarity. I've been using Red Hat Linux (and derivatives) since RH 6.2 was out, and I know it better than I know Debian or Ubuntu or Slackware or whatever.

RHEL is good for large companies using linux, and product developers releasing commercial products for linux. It is required for support for certain products on linux, like Oracle. Also, RHEL is tested with various distributed filesystems, etc.

stephen_g 11y ago

Businesses love it because every major release is like Ubuntu's LTS releases. RHEL 4 (released in 2004) is still in extended support! I assume their support is good also, but I haven't used that. For me though, I have a bunch of servers running CentOS just because it's extremely solid and stable. The price you pay is that all your packages are a little old, but there are repos to get new software, so I can be on the newest Postgres and Node etc.

davidw 11y ago

I've always been a Debian/Ubuntu guy, but the Redhat folks are good people and have continued to dedicate a lot of resources to open source software, through thick and thin.

Ologn 11y ago

If you have hundreds of HP Proliant servers, all with the latest firmware patches and some level of support, and they all run a supported version of RHEL, with some level of support, and once a week a different machine crashes and dumps the kernel core - if you have RHEL (and HP) support, you have a way to escalate the issue. They have kernel programmers on staff who know what errors might be in the kernel code that talks to, say, host bus adapters. What does a normal corporation do in this circumstance if they are running Debian servers? Insofar as competition in this space, SLES has been popular in heterogenous environments (a lot of Windows servers). Canonical and Ubuntu are newer competitors on the scene. Companies have been using Red Hat for 20 years, they are pretty good at their jobs. Also, RHEL is a flagship but Red Hat sells support for other products like JBoss.

rodgerd 11y ago
> Also, RHEL is a flagship but Red Hat sells support for other products like JBoss. Last I checked they make about as much out of the JBoss-branded software as they do out of the platform stuff.
jldugger 11y ago
RHEL is 800 per server. If you have hundreds of these servers, you could pay a developer 80k to sit around learning kernel development on the offhand chance this comes up.
- jon-wood 11y ago
  You could, but that's going to be the unloaded cost of a developer, add another 80k for benefits, tax, and everything else that comes with an employee. Even after that you've got a single kernel developer who might have learnt enough about the particular part of the kernel you're having problems with. Assuming its the kernel. Either that, or pay 80k to Red Hat, who have dozens of kernel developers one of whom probably knows about your issue, and if it turns out not to be the kernel probably have someone on staff that can investigate that as well. Worst case they know who to contact upstream to dig deeper into your issue.
- rwmj 11y ago
  And the good thing is that companies are free to do that. Take Google, for example. They don't pay Red Hat because they have the code and they have amazingly smart kernel developers. But that's (surprisingly) still good for Red Hat, since Red Hat benefits from the contributions to the kernel that Google makes. It's good for all users of Linux.

mdnormy 11y ago

Speaking from business perspective: Same reason many people using SUSE Linux. - Support - SLA - Familiarity and continuity Sure business can pay for Debian enterprise support too, but its slightly different mindset when the whole ecosystem was made for business and enterprise.

rodgerd 11y ago

Can you point me to the Debian developer who will supply me a kernel patch, on my time line, for a feature I need? Can you point me to the Debian developer who will give me follow the sun support on a problem that could be with the J2EE container, the OS, the virt layer, or the hardware, and has support arrangements with the vendors of all those things so they don't just sit around finger pointing? Can you point me at the J2EE container Canonical supply?

slgeorge 11y ago
a. Yes, Canonical will provide you with a patch to an issue in Ubuntu the same as RedHat. b. Yes Canonical has follow the sun support for the "Main" section of Ubuntu. This includes the OS, the virt layer and the hardware along with relationships with the hardware vendors. c. No Ubuntu doesn't do enterprise J2EE The only open source solution is TomCat and as you know they won't co-operate with other distributions.

mindcrime 11y ago

What's so good about RHEL/fedora vs debian or ubuntu server, say? It's mostly just a matter of personal taste / preference. I use both Ubuntu and Fedora/CentOS and there's not really any huge functional differences. For a long time, years ago, people argued that apt was a much better tool than yum, which may have been true at one time. But for quite some time now I've found yum to be equal to or superior to apt. Of course, Fedora has moved to dnf now, where dnf is a more modern, drop-in replacement (mostly anyway) for yum. For me, I tend to stick mostly with the RH derived distros just out of familiarity. I've been using Red Hat Linux (and derivatives) since RH 6.2 was out, and I know it better than I know Debian or Ubuntu or Slackware or whatever.