Fedora 4 XEN and Kernel 2.4xenU

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le mercredi 20 avril 2005 à 14:34 +1000, Russell Coker a écrit :
> On Wednesday 20 April 2005 03:34, Nicolas Mailhot 
> <Nicolas.Mailhot at laposte.net> wrote:

...

> > Especially if you try to optimise 
> > hardware occupation by having multiple separate system images (one for
> > every Oracle version you want to support, for example) and RHN wants to
> > charge you one license per system image (even though they are all on the
> > same physical hardware and can not be run separately)
> 
> Fair point.  Have you spoken to sales about this?

It was sales answer at the time. 

> > Now since you can't run RHEL, you will run FC or Centos or whatever. But
> > once you've qualified your product on this other Linux version, how long
> > do you think it will take some beancounter to realise you can sell your
> > product on this other Linux system, and avoid paying RH altogether ?
> > (remember, less $$$ for RH = more customer $$$ available for your part
> > of the system)
> 
> Selling Oracle on Fedora or Centos is not an option.  Oracle doesn't support 
> them, so anyone who pays for Oracle will want to pay for RHEL.

Any dba worth its salt will tell you Oracle support is only a promise to
look at problems, and since problems are often workload dependent it's
no substitute to testing yourself your workload on realistic systems (ie
as close to production systems hardware/software wise as you can make
them). This is why big corps freeze OS/Oracle versions and test them
themselves.

Now once you've beaten a system to death and verified Oracle likes your
CentOS/FC kernel/glibc versions (because they were the only ones you
could afford on test benches) the prospect of dropping it on an unknown
RHEL system can be more frightening than dispensing with Oracle support
(especially when it can be worked around with by having one RHEL system
somewhere, reproducing the bugs you can not cope with yourself here, and
then report them)

But since Arjan says RH got a dev program now I guess the problem is
partly solved (I hope he didn't think about the one where you have to
commit on supporting your app on a given RHEL version for five years -
for custom business apps that are evolving at a fast pace there is no
way anyone will sign on such a program).

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20050420/459373d3/attachment-0002.bin