Re: reiserfs on redhat advanced server?

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Ragnar Kjørstad wrote:

>On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 10:16:41PM +0300, Hans Reiser wrote:
>  
>
>>>does anyone have some expirience with the reiserfs provided in redhat's
>>>2.4.9-e.3 kernel from its Advanced Server?
>>>      
>>>
>>Linux 2.4.x did not become stable until 2.4.18.  I strongly advise not 
>>to use anything before 2.4.18 for a machine you care about.
>>
>>Well tested is not a substitute for stable.;-)
>>    
>>
>
>I don't know this kernel in particular, but in general RH's kernels are
>heavily patched, and 2.4.9-e.3 may actually be closer to 2.4.18 than
>2.4.9 from Linus.
>
>
>
>  
>
Heavily patched plus RedHat famous QA process without millions of end 
users testing it like Linus/Marcelo has (err, without them testing it 
before it ships on the CD I should say....), and you think it will be 
more stable than 2.4.9?

If you want a stable kernel for a mission critical server, the only 
thing that works is to ask around and find out what Marcelo kernel has 
been known stable for at least 6 weeks.

QA can do a lot to avoid wasting the time of testers with  bugs they 
needn't have gone through the pain of hitting, but it can only do so much.

Marcelo is very responsible and effective in his management of the 
stable kernel series.  He is unusually talented.  RedHat doesn't have 
anyone in his league doing QA --- you could throw a dart in a room of 
professional release managers, and chances are low that you would not do 
better than RedHat did.  

I would never choose to use a RedHat kernel over a Marcelo kernel.

What I find really interesting is that RedHat marketing manages to make 
a lot of people think that a RedHat kernel is less adventurous than a 
Marcelo kernel, when it is very much the other way around.

-- 
Hans