On 21/10/2019 16:13, Dimitri Maziuk via Bacula-users wrote: > On 10/21/2019 9:14 AM, Clark, Patti via Bacula-users wrote: > ... >> My question (rhetorical), why do you want to use an OS that is >> recently released and still bleeding for a backup server? I >> understand upgrade headaches, but backup servers need to be rock solid. > > Why use any RHEL > 6 for any kind of server? >
Because RHEL6 is EOL and won't even install on newer hardware? (EOS is some time off, but it's on life support mode now - bug/security fixes only and one of the more annoying "features" is that RHEL6 doesn't support ECN properly - it has ECN but not ECN fallback, so it can hammer the living daylights out of routers. In addition it's quite difficult to fully secure a php-using webserver on RHEL6 using stock RPMs) As for "Why use RHEL?" - Corporate policy. The scientific Linux community standardised on redhat 20 years ago and they're unlikely to change anytime soon despite arguments about other flavours being "better" (Most of them are still using Fortran code rooted in f77 which breaks if you attempt to update it, or IDL despite it being "simply awful") I spend an awful lot of time making things work in a RHEL environment when it "just works" in Debianish ones, but the choice of environment isn't my call. Everything has its positives and negatives - as Kern knows, I _really_ want Bacula to support the IBM lin_tape driver because it works far better with LTOs and changers - particularly in FC/SAS multipath environments but Baculasystems won't do that because the st driver works just fine(*) and the RHEL vs Debian arguments work in much the same way. (*) For some values of "fine" - st and sg don't handle multipathing _at all_ and you end up with door locking contention issues that have caused us issues for 15 years _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
