4 ms·
I thought that was well known, it's not like they were secretive about it, in fact they openly advertised it. Their sales pitch, I think was, that many customer
by krylon 3y ago
I thought that was well known, it's not like they were secretive about it, in fact they openly advertised it. Their sales pitch, I think was, that many customers ran Oracle software on RHEL, and this way they would have a single provider of support for both the OS and the software running on it.
Given Oracle's rather well-earned reputation, that does not sound like an attractive proposal to me, but there's a chance orgs that are on the hook for anything Oracle already might not share that assessment.
IIRC, Oracle's move to eat part of Red Hat's lunch was considered the reason Red Hat stopped making the kernel source available in the form of mainline tree + patches, thus making it less convenient for Oracle's staff to provide support at the same level of expertise as Red Hat, but I don't think anyone working at Red Hat has commented on this on the record.
- raincom 3y agoWhen Oracle started offering support for the oracle db on RHEL, whenever there are performance issues and other issues, Oracle used to blame RHEL. So oracle DBAs are trained to go back Redhat for issues. Usually, these support issues bounce back and forth: Oracle blames Redhat, which says it’s an oracle issue. In the mean time, oracle support folks just buy sweet time. Then came Oracle enterprise linux: oracle supporting the whole stack, OS and databases. Which enterprise customer doesn’t want that. Not only that, many corporate customers of RHEL switched to Oracle Linux, as oracle charges way less for each installation.
- worthless-trash 3y agoAs an employee, I dont think anyone can. I'd make speculation here, but we all know how that ends up being twisted into misunderstanidng. The current kernel source is available on gitlab though (centos-streams) because now centos streams is upstream of rhel kernel.