Re: OS Question
- From: "Jared Still" <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "JOHNSTON, WAYNE" <wjohnsto@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 15:03:28 -0800
Dell servers, I forget the actual model number.
Dual 4 core CPU's, 32 gig of RAM.
Netapp SAN for storage
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 1:18 PM, JOHNSTON, WAYNE <wjohnsto@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jared,
>
>
>
> Just curious, what hardware are you running Linux on?
>
>
>
> Wayne
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Jared Still
> *Sent:* Friday, January 02, 2009 4:11 PM
> *To:* Richard.Goulet@xxxxxxxxxxx
> *Cc:* oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* Re: OS Question
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Goulet, Richard <
> Richard.Goulet@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Anyone using Oracle's version of Linux from their web site??
>
>
>
> I've been using it for test environments for about 15 months.
>
> There have been no issues with it.
>
> I would not mind using it in production, but the production servers are
> built
> by the SysOps team, and the official Linux here is RH ES 4.
>
> Essentially Oracle's linux is identical to RH - it's just recompiled source
> with an Oracle logo.
>
> Unless you are going to use it in a production environment and want to
> get 'unbreakable' support from Oracle, I don't think it really matters if
> you
> use Oracle, RedHat, CentOs, WhiteBox or some other distribution.
>
> Aside from logos and possible default sites for updates, they're pretty
> much the same thing.
>
> I've used them all for Oracle, and they have all worked.
>
> There's other folks on this list that have probably built a lot more of
> these
> than I have, maybe they will chime in as well.
>
> Jared
>
>
Other related posts:
