From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Mason Subject: Re: reiserfs on redhat advanced server? Date: 31 Jan 2003 09:23:20 -0500 Message-ID: <1044023000.15680.180.camel@tiny.suse.com> References: <3E397A19.60409@namesys.com> <20030130234142.E8448@vestdata.no> <3E3A6071.6060102@namesys.com> <20030131115333.GC15359@marowsky-bree.de> <3E3A67AE.4050601@namesys.com> <20030131122147.GE15359@marowsky-bree.de> <3E3A6D76.7080300@namesys.com> <20030131123943.GH15359@marowsky-bree.de> <20030131160624.A12036@namesys.com> <1044021310.15684.154.camel@tiny.suse.com> <20030131170855.A13196@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20030131170855.A13196@namesys.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Oleg Drokin Cc: Lars Marowsky-Bree , Hans Reiser , reiserfs-list@namesys.com On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 09:08, Oleg Drokin wrote: > Hello! > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 08:55:11AM -0500, Chris Mason wrote: > > the distro kernels are more suitable for production use than a vanilla > > kernel. These companies are betting their support time and future > > This is questionable. Distro's QA cannot just test all possible patterns. > So there are some kinds of usage (even in production) where vanilla > kernel is the best thing to use (at least until vendor releases an errata > kernel). > What you end up with is a vendor kernel that has been specifically tested in a given workload, and they tend to work very well in that config. The vanilla kernels do have a broader testing base, and they do get a wider variety of bug fixes. But they don't get the concentrated high end certification and testing the vendor kernels do. And that last little bit of certification is _really_ hard. > > revenue on their kernels working properly, and the distros take that > > very seriously. > > That's true. > > > The fact that nobody actually ships a vanilla kernel should make it > > pretty clear the stock releases are not ready for the tasks our > > Well, I provided an example of people who ship vanilla kernels. > But not a recent example of someone using them in a high end configuration. It's even possible that someone has, but doing it over time for release after release? Those are the customers that end up going to redhat and suse. -chris