Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Thought I would report back that we went with Windows 2008 R2 Standard Edition. It was less expensive than RHEL with our host site, and our VAR did not want to go with CentOS onlly because Rocket does not support it. --dawn On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.comwrote: We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Of course, it is likely to take Rocket LONGER than that to certify U2 on a newly released OS platform, so no real deal breaker! -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Robert Porter Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 12:31 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be slightly behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. Those sources have to be released before work can start. How long? It can be significant... RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010. CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 2011 - 8 months to the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - just something to be aware of when your trying to decide. Personally, I love CentOS and run it on many machines. Robert F. Porter, MCSE, CCNA, ZCE, OCP-Java Lead Sr. Programmer / Analyst Laboratory Information Services Ochsner Health System This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
It took us about 3 months to certified the first database on Windows 8/Server 2012 - so it all depends on 1) demand and 2) how much the new OS breaks. :) From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org on behalf of Ross Ferris ro...@stamina.com.au Sent: Friday, 19 July 2013 1:41 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? Of course, it is likely to take Rocket LONGER than that to certify U2 on a newly released OS platform, so no real deal breaker! -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Robert Porter Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 12:31 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be slightly behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. Those sources have to be released before work can start. How long? It can be significant... RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010. CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 2011 - 8 months to the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - just something to be aware of when your trying to decide. Personally, I love CentOS and run it on many machines. Robert F. Porter, MCSE, CCNA, ZCE, OCP-Java Lead Sr. Programmer / Analyst Laboratory Information Services Ochsner Health System This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Has anyone tried running on Windows Core? Thats the preferred option for HIgh Availability with Sql Server. Dont know if that is possible for uv. Sent from my iPhone On 18 Jul 2013, at 05:11, Tony Gravagno 3xk547...@sneakemail.com wrote: Dawn, you and I have had chats about Windows vs Linux before. In many ways the landscape has changed but honestly it's still the same for many of the reasons you had for avoiding Windows in the first place. My approach is the be versatile and many of our colleagues do the same - just use whatever works in a given context and try not to lock yourself in to any one OS. While that does introduce a need to add more skills into the toolkit, overall it's not that bad. I have more issues shifting mental gears between MV environments than OS's. My rule of thumb is to use IIS when I need .NET and Windows tools but to use Linux when I need shell and common FOSS packages like Drupal, WordPress, Bugzilla, etc. I don't care if I should be able to run WAMP, most GNU-based FOSS these days is coded with prejudice against Windows and we simply need LAMP to run it. All in all, while I haven't settled on a single provider yet, I have tried services with Amazon, RackSpace, Dreamhost, and a couple others I can't recall. They're pretty much all the same except when it comes to support when you really need it - caveat emptor. There are a few companies in our industry who also specialize in hosting MV environments - take a look around. As far as hosting, root-access hosts are dirt-cheap these days, and most don't weigh you down with licensing issues anymore either. With the exception of MV DBMS vendors, most tier-1 providers recognize that they make more from having a 10, 100, or 1000 systems out there than they do trying to get a single site to pay for 10, 100, or 1000 licenses. (Rant on clueless MV marketing and industrial suicide omitted.) Finally, we're talking about doing business. If you're running a production server then your revenue needs to cover the total expense of doing business. You're not paying support fees, your clients are, and if that eats into your expected profits and budgeting then perhaps your business model needs a tweak rather than taking chances with lack of support. If you're not charging for services then you should consider a freemium model, as this is how other sites manage. If this is a totally unfunded operation then perhaps going with freeware is your best option. HTH T From Dawn Wolthuis We are nailing down costs from the hosting provider for each option. It looks like Windows 2008 Standard is less expensive per month than RHEL 6 with the hosting site we are using (primarily because of the $500 annual cost for RHEL). My colleague uses his own perl scripts with apache, so he is not excited about IIS. My only issue with IIS has to do with poor experiences to date, but when I check the date, it is somewhere around 2001. Perhaps I need not hold a grudge that long? cheers! --dawn ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] CentOS with Universe?
We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
We use CentOS for our Linux web servers, and for most of our customers. CentOS is RHEL. It's compiled from the RedHat sources, which are freely available. The only changes the CentOS team makes is the logos. If it will run on RHEL, it will run on CentOS. Larry Hiscock Western Computer Services -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 6:42 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: [U2] CentOS with Universe? We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Larry knows more than me! Dale ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
The only concern I might have is if you have to bring Rocket in for support... will they support it. Perry -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 7:42 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: [U2] CentOS with Universe? We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. ZirMed, Inc. has strict policies regarding the content of e-mail communications, specifically Protected Health Information, any communications containing such material will be returned to the originating party with such advisement noted. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Dawn, You could easily spend more on your var's efforts than the RHEL 6 and have no assurance of success. Dale On 07/17/2013 08:41 AM, Dawn Wolthuis wrote: We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be slightly behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. Those sources have to be released before work can start. How long? It can be significant... RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010. CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 2011 - 8 months to the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - just something to be aware of when your trying to decide. Personally, I love CentOS and run it on many machines. Robert F. Porter, MCSE, CCNA, ZCE, OCP-Java Lead Sr. Programmer / Analyst Laboratory Information Services Ochsner Health System This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
While CentOS is effectively RHEL, and generally speaking, runs fine, there is always the chance that a difference is introduced (say an environment difference on the machine that compiled the source) that could adversely support UniVerse. CentOS 32-bit will be easier for you as our RHEL port is currently 32-bit. CentOS is not a Rocket supported OS. Rocket may require you to reproduce a reported issue on a supported platform. As a word of caution, we commonly work with OS providers (and sometimes hardware providers) to determine the root cause of an issue. With RHEL support, we have someone to work with, with CentOS we do not. Regards, Dan On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.com wrote: We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
I have been personally using universe on CentOS since version 5.1 (of CentOS) with ZERO issues, now granted I am using this personally with the personal edition of universe, the one issue you would have would be byte ordering (easily fixable) if coming from windows but you would have that with any flavor of linux/unix. so in my using universe with CentOS over the last 5 years or so (in a personal setting) I have had zero problems dougc On 7/17/2013 9:41 AM, Dawn Wolthuis wrote: We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
I read this as stable version So that's a good thing :) You don't want to be their beta tester -Original Message- From: Robert Porter ropor...@ochsner.org To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 7:32 am Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be slightly behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. Those sources have to be released before work can start. How long? It can be significant... RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010. CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 2011 - 8 months to the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - just something to be aware of when your trying to decide. Personally, I love CentOS and run it on many machines. Robert F. Porter, MCSE, CCNA, ZCE, OCP-Java Lead Sr. Programmer / Analyst Laboratory Information Services Ochsner Health System This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Are you saying your client wouldn't pay $750 for Windows Server 2008 R2? ...and you actually get paid? :-) Bill - Original Message - *From:* dw...@tincat-group.com *To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org *Date:* 7/17/2013 6:41 AM *Subject:* [U2] CentOS with Universe? We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
On 17/07/13 15:31, Robert Porter wrote: The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be slightly behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. Those sources have to be released before work can start. How long? It can be significant... RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010. CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 2011 - 8 months to the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - just something to be aware of when your trying to decide. Personally, I love CentOS and run it on many machines. Another possibility is Scientific Linux - also an RHEL clone. But do you have any RHEL boxes on which you pay support? Because if you do, what's the problem with adding another? And if you don't why don't you run RHEL anyway? I would let the VAR load RHEL. The only problem with doing that is the terms of RH's support contract - and if you don't have one then that's your lookout. If you take out a support contract the terms are you pay support for ALL your machines running RHEL. You can't install four copies and only pay for two. But there's nothing to stop you installing a hundred copies and paying for none. I know - this Free Software paradigm can be a bit difficult to understand sometimes :-) Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
From: Dawn Wolthuis We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Dawn, you have accurate responses from everyone: 1) Should be exactly the same. 2) Might not be. 3) There is risk involved. Personally I run CentOS whenever I need Linux. But it does have its own errors from time to time, and sometimes it takes a while to get them fixed - just visit the CentOS forum and see what people are talking about. That's the gamble we take for freeware. (It's only free if your time is worthless.) How much does RHEL Support help? Well, many systems I know never even update their RHEL systems. They install and then don't want to patch because it might mess up dependencies, forcing a reinstall. And RedHat does the same themselves to an extent - they guarantee that their distro isn't volatile like Fedora - in part because they don't provide many updates to common FOSS after production. As an example, you need an update to something like cURL (v7.19 from the current RHEL6 yum update but v7.31 in real world) you'll have to get it from somewhere other than RedHat, and that could break a lot of stuff. And because they bashed Windows for so many years about this (DLL HELL) before drinking the Linux Kool-Aid, these folks are afraid to say Linux has exactly the same problems, or afraid to admit they don't update their system, or maybe they just don't know that their packages are a couple years old and unpatched. (No need for people to jump in to reassure us that you update your personal system(s) - trading anecdotes doesn't change the fact that other people do things differently.) But the real point here ... is that once U2 is working, and it should out of the box, then it shouldn't break, as long as you don't change anything. It's been around since 2010 and CentOS is right there with it now. The only time you could have issues is when U2 is certified over a new RH release and CentOS hasn't caught up to them yet. The cost for not being with a current RHEL release is that you won't be able to install a brand new OS/DBMS combo with confidence, you'll just have to wait a while for the dust to settle. Now, what if you do get that brand new release of RH/UV and it breaks. You need to wait for Rocket to work with RH anyway. So if you're going to wait there anyway, why not just wait a little longer and get it all free? You asked how much pain would we be introducing ... all we can tell is how much pain you could or might, not would. The odds are in your favor - chances are very slim that there will be an issue in RHEL that affects U2, that it will get fixed by RH but not passed on in CentOS. There's just a time delay - you'd be paying RedHat to get changes to you faster, that's all, but you'll eventually get the same changes from CentOS. HTH T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Hi Bill -- Ah, this time I'm in the client seat, desiring a hosted solution for Universe. We will choose the same box for starters for the web server as well. The VAR runs IIS on Windows, but Apache on linux. Given that info, which OS would you select for Universe 11.1? --dawn On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Bill Haskett wphask...@advantos.netwrote: Are you saying your client wouldn't pay $750 for Windows Server 2008 R2? ...and you actually get paid? :-) Bill --**--** - Original Message - *From:* dw...@tincat-group.com *To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org *Date:* 7/17/2013 6:41 AM *Subject:* [U2] CentOS with Universe? We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from RHEL isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If you are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for development or support, then it is probably less of an issue. If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story. Dan McGrath Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab Rocket Software 4600 South Ulster Street · Suite 1100 · Denver, CO 80237 · USA T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W: u2.rocketsoftware.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:38 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? From: Dawn Wolthuis We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Dawn, you have accurate responses from everyone: 1) Should be exactly the same. 2) Might not be. 3) There is risk involved. Personally I run CentOS whenever I need Linux. But it does have its own errors from time to time, and sometimes it takes a while to get them fixed - just visit the CentOS forum and see what people are talking about. That's the gamble we take for freeware. (It's only free if your time is worthless.) How much does RHEL Support help? Well, many systems I know never even update their RHEL systems. They install and then don't want to patch because it might mess up dependencies, forcing a reinstall. And RedHat does the same themselves to an extent - they guarantee that their distro isn't volatile like Fedora - in part because they don't provide many updates to common FOSS after production. As an example, you need an update to something like cURL (v7.19 from the current RHEL6 yum update but v7.31 in real world) you'll have to get it from somewhere other than RedHat, and that could break a lot of stuff. And because they bashed Windows for so many years about this (DLL HELL) before drinking the Linux Kool-Aid, these folks are afraid to say Linux has exactly the same problems, or afraid to admit they don't update their system, or maybe they just don't know that their packages are a couple years old and unpatched. (No need for people to jump in to reassure us that you update your personal system(s) - trading anecdotes doesn't change the fact that other people do things differently.) But the real point here ... is that once U2 is working, and it should out of the box, then it shouldn't break, as long as you don't change anything. It's been around since 2010 and CentOS is right there with it now. The only time you could have issues is when U2 is certified over a new RH release and CentOS hasn't caught up to them yet. The cost for not being with a current RHEL release is that you won't be able to install a brand new OS/DBMS combo with confidence, you'll just have to wait a while for the dust to settle. Now, what if you do get that brand new release of RH/UV and it breaks. You need to wait for Rocket to work with RH anyway. So if you're going to wait there anyway, why not just wait a little longer and get it all free? You asked how much pain would we be introducing ... all we can tell is how much pain you could or might, not would. The odds are in your favor - chances are very slim that there will be an issue in RHEL that affects U2, that it will get fixed by RH but not passed on in CentOS. There's just a time delay - you'd be paying RedHat to get changes to you faster, that's all, but you'll eventually get the same changes from CentOS. HTH T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Dawn: I kind of figured. :-) Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be fine. I would just not look for anything free, because nothing is free. I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated and I know every machine I run is running the same version of Windows. It seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with the software I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my life a lot easier. IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is too, with virtual accounts as act like real Windows accounts. Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows as it is on ..nix. Although you may have specific reasons to run on ..nix I would think free shouldn't be one of them. Just a thought. Bill - Original Message - *From:* dw...@tincat-group.com *To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org *Date:* 7/17/2013 10:48 AM *Subject:* Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? Hi Bill -- Ah, this time I'm in the client seat, desiring a hosted solution for Universe. We will choose the same box for starters for the web server as well. The VAR runs IIS on Windows, but Apache on linux. Given that info, which OS would you select for Universe 11.1? --dawn On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Bill Haskett wphask...@advantos.netwrote: Are you saying your client wouldn't pay $750 for Windows Server 2008 R2? ...and you actually get paid? :-) Bill --**--** - Original Message - *From:* dw...@tincat-group.com *To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org *Date:* 7/17/2013 6:41 AM *Subject:* [U2] CentOS with Universe? We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn __**_ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Hi Dan, When will Universe be 64-bit? This year, next year, never. I am not after specific dates, but is it on the project lifeline? Cheers Phil -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 2:57 a.m. To: U2 Users List Cc: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? While CentOS is effectively RHEL, and generally speaking, runs fine, there is always the chance that a difference is introduced (say an environment difference on the machine that compiled the source) that could adversely support UniVerse. CentOS 32-bit will be easier for you as our RHEL port is currently 32-bit. CentOS is not a Rocket supported OS. Rocket may require you to reproduce a reported issue on a supported platform. As a word of caution, we commonly work with OS providers (and sometimes hardware providers) to determine the root cause of an issue. With RHEL support, we have someone to work with, with CentOS we do not. Regards, Dan On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.com wrote: We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
On 17/07/2013 19:09, Bill Haskett wrote: Dawn: I kind of figured. :-) Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be fine. I would just not look for anything free, because nothing is free. It's only free if your time is worth nothing - I think that's one of Tony's quotes. Just don't forget, linux is Free, which is completely different. I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated and I know every machine I run is running the same version of Windows. It seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with the software I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my life a lot easier. IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is too, with virtual accounts as act like real Windows accounts. And yet we hear loads of stories about how updates regularly break Windows ... although they tend to be client stuff that suffers most of that. The counter-advantage of linux is it's easy to run a stripped-down box with only the services you want. Especially with a net-facing system, how easy is it to run Windows with everything except IIS locked-down/disabled/deleted? And on linux you have total control over updates too. I don't think you want to run gentoo like me, but if you've got someone who can administer the system you could run Apache on one system facing the net, on a totally locked-down system (maybe even with a DVD as your system drive) with a firewall between that and your UV system. I'd be a little bit worried about having just one Windows system, net-facing, running both the web server and the database. Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows as it is on ..nix. Although you may have specific reasons to run on ..nix I would think free shouldn't be one of them. Just a thought. A sensible thought :-) but you can see which way I'd go :-) Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
I'm not sure why you'd say that. I wouldn't create a caveat that my time is worth nothing; thus, as Tony says, Linux ain't free. I have very little trouble with Windows, so, again, I'm not sure what you refer to about not putting IIS and the dbms server on the same box and face it towards the internet...Windows is much better than it used to be. The minimal amount of configuration, along with a firewall device and/or router seems to work just fine, especially in our development environment. Now, if you want to work with the Active Directory on Windows Server 2012, or configure a VPN on your firewall/VPN device, then you might as well just shoot yourself instead! :-) I use Windows because, in the aggregate, using it has saved me a lot of time with our customers. YMMV... Bill - Original Message - *From:* antli...@youngman.org.uk *To:* u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org *Date:* 7/17/2013 12:25 PM *Subject:* Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? On 17/07/2013 19:09, Bill Haskett wrote: Dawn: I kind of figured. :-) Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be fine. I would just not look for anything free, because nothing is free. It's only free if your time is worth nothing - I think that's one of Tony's quotes. Just don't forget, linux is Free, which is completely different. I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated and I know every machine I run is running the same version of Windows. It seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with the software I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my life a lot easier. IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is too, with virtual accounts as act like real Windows accounts. And yet we hear loads of stories about how updates regularly break Windows ... although they tend to be client stuff that suffers most of that. The counter-advantage of linux is it's easy to run a stripped-down box with only the services you want. Especially with a net-facing system, how easy is it to run Windows with everything except IIS locked-down/disabled/deleted? And on linux you have total control over updates too. I don't think you want to run gentoo like me, but if you've got someone who can administer the system you could run Apache on one system facing the net, on a totally locked-down system (maybe even with a DVD as your system drive) with a firewall between that and your UV system. I'd be a little bit worried about having just one Windows system, net-facing, running both the web server and the database. Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows as it is on ..nix. Although you may have specific reasons to run on ..nix I would think free shouldn't be one of them. Just a thought. A sensible thought :-) but you can see which way I'd go :-) Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
But. Speaking of Universe on Windows, we've gone through a hundred or so Windows upgrades, and I can't point out one that's had any affect on Universe at all. So while it's true that Windows upgrades can break things, they don't seem to be breaking Universe. -Original Message- From: Anthonys Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk To: u2-users u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 12:26 pm Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? On 17/07/2013 19:09, Bill Haskett wrote: Dawn: I kind of figured. :-) Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be fine. I would just not look for anything free, because nothing is free. It's only free if your time is worth nothing - I think that's one of Tony's quotes. Just don't forget, linux is Free, which is completely different. I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated and I know every machine I run is running the same version of Windows. It seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with the software I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my life a lot easier. IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is too, with virtual accounts as act like real Windows accounts. And yet we hear loads of stories about how updates regularly break Windows ... although they tend to be client stuff that suffers most of that. The counter-advantage of linux is it's easy to run a stripped-down box with only the services you want. Especially with a net-facing system, how easy is it to run Windows with everything except IIS locked-down/disabled/deleted? And on linux you have total control over updates too. I don't think you want to run gentoo like me, but if you've got someone who can administer the system you could run Apache on one system facing the net, on a totally locked-down system (maybe even with a DVD as your system drive) with a firewall between that and your UV system. I'd be a little bit worried about having just one Windows system, net-facing, running both the web server and the database. Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows as it is on ..nix. Although you may have specific reasons to run on ..nix I would think free shouldn't be one of them. Just a thought. A sensible thought :-) but you can see which way I'd go :-) Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
UniVerse is already 64-bit on AIX and HP-UX and have been for quite a while. We plan on Windows 64-bit being out later this year (people are already beta testing it) and are working on Linux and Solaris. For most people, unless you are a really big system, you don't really get much benefit from being 64-bit due to the database architecture which allows you to bypass many of the reasons other databases may be more easily restricted by being 32-bit only. Cheers, Dan From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org on behalf of Phil Walker p...@gnosys.co.nz Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2013 12:31 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? Hi Dan, When will Universe be 64-bit? This year, next year, never. I am not after specific dates, but is it on the project lifeline? Cheers Phil -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 2:57 a.m. To: U2 Users List Cc: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? While CentOS is effectively RHEL, and generally speaking, runs fine, there is always the chance that a difference is introduced (say an environment difference on the machine that compiled the source) that could adversely support UniVerse. CentOS 32-bit will be easier for you as our RHEL port is currently 32-bit. CentOS is not a Rocket supported OS. Rocket may require you to reproduce a reported issue on a supported platform. As a word of caution, we commonly work with OS providers (and sometimes hardware providers) to determine the root cause of an issue. With RHEL support, we have someone to work with, with CentOS we do not. Regards, Dan On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.com wrote: We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Thanks. --dawn -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Dawn, just to add my 0.02, I have a couple of production CentOS servers but run UV on RHEL. UV is the most mission-critical app we have and I feel it would be too much of a risk to run it on an unsupported platform. And I would take Tony's point that Linux has the exact same update headaches as Windows one step further and say that it's worse. I choose to run UV on RHEL because I rely heavily on custom UV integration with system utilities like cron and open-source apps like postfix, cURL and wget. Installing all available updates a la Windows on the RHEL UV box is something I'd never do, though, because the risk of breaking something is too high. To give an example, I installed all the latest updates on the less mission-critical of our CentOS servers a while back and it broke the freeRADIUS service we use to authenticate wifi clients via Active Directory. Fortunately the other CentOS server is a backup freeRADIUS server, but it was still time consuming to fix. When RH or CentOS updates an app, any config files replaced are backed up in the current location with an extension of .rpmnew. When freeRADIUS starts up it reads every config file in its directory regardless of name, so this totally borked the installation. Fixing it was a matter of opening both the old and new versions of all 7 replaced config files in a GUI text editor with diff capability and painstakingly merging the original config into the new files. I probably spent a couple of hours on it, and that was just one application. UV is in use 24x7 and an outage like that on our UV server would be catastrophic. Having said that, I think a case could be made for running UV on CentOS if the initial installation runs stably and you don't plan to patch it. I would thoroughly test every aspect of UV, but once you're certain it's stable, you aren't likely to need support if you don't break anything going forward. Lack of patches sounds like a security risk on the face of it, but good security isn't a black and white issue. If no unnecessary services are listening on the box, no end users have direct access to the OS shell, and the box isn't directly open to the internet, it's pretty secure IMHO. RH may issue a ton of critical security updates for various services, but if you're not running those services, or if a user needs OS shell access they don't have to execute a privilege escalation, those updates are irrelevant. There are lots of add'l security measures that you can take to further protect the server, such as installing the free OSSEC intrusion detection utility from Trend Micro and running ssh on a non-default port. As Dan said, the question of whether or not to run UV on an unsupported platform really depends on the risk tolerance of the client where it's installed and how they're using it. It's not appropriate for our environment, but if someone else decides the cost savings outweigh the risks for them after carefully considering both, I wouldn't necessarily tell them it's a bad idea. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:00 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from RHEL isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If you are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for development or support, then it is probably less of an issue. If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story. Dan McGrath Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab Rocket Software 4600 South Ulster Street · Suite 1100 · Denver, CO 80237 · USA T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W: u2.rocketsoftware.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:38 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? From: Dawn Wolthuis We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along? Dawn, you have accurate responses from everyone: 1) Should be exactly the same. 2) Might not be. 3) There is risk involved. Personally I run CentOS whenever I need Linux. But it does have its own errors from time to time, and sometimes it takes a while to get them fixed - just visit the CentOS forum and see what people are talking about. That's
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Thanks to all who responded. There is plenty of wisdom in the sum of all of these posts. We are nailing down costs from the hosting provider for each option. It looks like Windows 2008 Standard is less expensive per month than RHEL 6 with the hosting site we are using (primarily because of the $500 annual cost for RHEL). My colleague uses his own perl scripts with apache, so he is not excited about IIS. My only issue with IIS has to do with poor experiences to date, but when I check the date, it is somewhere around 2001. Perhaps I need not hold a grudge that long? cheers! --dawn On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 7:48 PM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: Dawn, just to add my 0.02, I have a couple of production CentOS servers but run UV on RHEL. UV is the most mission-critical app we have and I feel it would be too much of a risk to run it on an unsupported platform. And I would take Tony's point that Linux has the exact same update headaches as Windows one step further and say that it's worse. I choose to run UV on RHEL because I rely heavily on custom UV integration with system utilities like cron and open-source apps like postfix, cURL and wget. Installing all available updates a la Windows on the RHEL UV box is something I'd never do, though, because the risk of breaking something is too high. To give an example, I installed all the latest updates on the less mission-critical of our CentOS servers a while back and it broke the freeRADIUS service we use to authenticate wifi clients via Active Directory. Fortunately the other CentOS server is a backup freeRADIUS server, but it was still time consuming to fix. When RH or CentOS updates an app, any config files replaced are backed up in the current location with an extension of .rpmnew. When freeRADIUS starts up it reads every config file in its directory regardless of name, so this totally borked the installation. Fixing it was a matter of opening both the old and new versions of all 7 replaced config files in a GUI text editor with diff capability and painstakingly merging the original config into the new files. I probably spent a couple of hours on it, and that was just one application. UV is in use 24x7 and an outage like that on our UV server would be catastrophic. Having said that, I think a case could be made for running UV on CentOS if the initial installation runs stably and you don't plan to patch it. I would thoroughly test every aspect of UV, but once you're certain it's stable, you aren't likely to need support if you don't break anything going forward. Lack of patches sounds like a security risk on the face of it, but good security isn't a black and white issue. If no unnecessary services are listening on the box, no end users have direct access to the OS shell, and the box isn't directly open to the internet, it's pretty secure IMHO. RH may issue a ton of critical security updates for various services, but if you're not running those services, or if a user needs OS shell access they don't have to execute a privilege escalation, those updates are irrelevant. There are lots of add'l security measures that you can take to further protect the server, such as installing the free OSSEC intrusion detection utility from Trend Micro and running ssh on a non-default port. As Dan said, the question of whether or not to run UV on an unsupported platform really depends on the risk tolerance of the client where it's installed and how they're using it. It's not appropriate for our environment, but if someone else decides the cost savings outweigh the risks for them after carefully considering both, I wouldn't necessarily tell them it's a bad idea. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:00 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from RHEL isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If you are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for development or support, then it is probably less of an issue. If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story. Dan McGrath Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab Rocket Software 4600 South Ulster Street · Suite 1100 · Denver, CO 80237 · USA T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W: u2.rocketsoftware.com -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:38 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? From: Dawn Wolthuis We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application
Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?
Any reason you cannot do Apache on Windows? From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org on behalf of Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.com Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2013 8:26 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? Thanks to all who responded. There is plenty of wisdom in the sum of all of these posts. We are nailing down costs from the hosting provider for each option. It looks like Windows 2008 Standard is less expensive per month than RHEL 6 with the hosting site we are using (primarily because of the $500 annual cost for RHEL). My colleague uses his own perl scripts with apache, so he is not excited about IIS. My only issue with IIS has to do with poor experiences to date, but when I check the date, it is somewhere around 2001. Perhaps I need not hold a grudge that long? cheers! --dawn On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 7:48 PM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote: Dawn, just to add my 0.02, I have a couple of production CentOS servers but run UV on RHEL. UV is the most mission-critical app we have and I feel it would be too much of a risk to run it on an unsupported platform. And I would take Tony's point that Linux has the exact same update headaches as Windows one step further and say that it's worse. I choose to run UV on RHEL because I rely heavily on custom UV integration with system utilities like cron and open-source apps like postfix, cURL and wget. Installing all available updates a la Windows on the RHEL UV box is something I'd never do, though, because the risk of breaking something is too high. To give an example, I installed all the latest updates on the less mission-critical of our CentOS servers a while back and it broke the freeRADIUS service we use to authenticate wifi clients via Active Directory. Fortunately the other CentOS server is a backup freeRADIUS server, but it was still time consuming to fix. When RH or CentOS updates an app, any config files replaced are backed up in the current location with an extension of .rpmnew. When freeRADIUS starts up it reads every config file in its directory regardless of name, so this totally borked the installation. Fixing it was a matter of opening both the old and new versions of all 7 replaced config files in a GUI text editor with diff capability and painstakingly merging the original config into the new files. I probably spent a couple of hours on it, and that was just one application. UV is in use 24x7 and an outage like that on our UV server would be catastrophic. Having said that, I think a case could be made for running UV on CentOS if the initial installation runs stably and you don't plan to patch it. I would thoroughly test every aspect of UV, but once you're certain it's stable, you aren't likely to need support if you don't break anything going forward. Lack of patches sounds like a security risk on the face of it, but good security isn't a black and white issue. If no unnecessary services are listening on the box, no end users have direct access to the OS shell, and the box isn't directly open to the internet, it's pretty secure IMHO. RH may issue a ton of critical security updates for various services, but if you're not running those services, or if a user needs OS shell access they don't have to execute a privilege escalation, those updates are irrelevant. There are lots of add'l security measures that you can take to further protect the server, such as installing the free OSSEC intrusion detection utility from Trend Micro and running ssh on a non-default port. As Dan said, the question of whether or not to run UV on an unsupported platform really depends on the risk tolerance of the client where it's installed and how they're using it. It's not appropriate for our environment, but if someone else decides the cost savings outweigh the risks for them after carefully considering both, I wouldn't necessarily tell them it's a bad idea. -John -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:00 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe? In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from RHEL isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If you are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for development or support, then it is probably less of an issue. If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story. Dan McGrath Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab Rocket Software 4600 South Ulster Street · Suite 1100 · Denver, CO 80237 · USA T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W: u2.rocketsoftware.com -Original Message- From: u2-users
