Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Tim <tim@connectlive.com>]

Whatever other people may say about RedHat, I have found that (with rare
and well-documented exceptions) their kernels (as kernel-2.x.x-source
and kernel-2.x.x-headers RPMs) accept patches fairly well (if not, I'm
comfortable doing it manually) and have been reliable in some extremely
high-load environments, when properly customized.  RH is most definitely
not perfect, but 7.2 is IMHO a perfectly serviceable starting point for
large systems.  I have used Debian, LinuxPPC, Solaris, AIX, FreeBSD,
etc. in the past and they all have their ups and downs, but my *nix
systems are either OpenBSD or RedHat these days, and the reason is
simply that I can get better support for them than anything else.

LVM on RH7.2 has worked well for me, but as I previously mentioned, the
support for LSI Logic boards is quite solid, and using hardware
enclosures eliminates an enormous number of potential problems.


> Although my first thought is to write RH and remind them how much we
> hate it when they build things in a non standard way and therefore cause
> other standard systems to break. I have several peices of hardware that
> are only supported with a RH kernel. I may be braver than some in the
> fact that I have removed the RH kernel and used in to build other
> distros with it. RH should provide a source version of the kernel in
> which you can attempt to put XFS into, then compile, and should still be
> able to load the promise driver into that new kernel. It will take some
> effort, but should be usable. Of course you could return it as
> essentially broken and buy the 3ware card that has better support.

-- 
     "To be suspended from the legal profession is the moral equivalent of 
      being ostracized by child molesters."
                                                           --Ian Rowan