rhel or fedora

paulr1984 · 04-25-2005, 11:29 AM

Hi!

I'm looking for a good reason to use rhel instead of fedora core as an os for hosting an application which will have about 20,000 concurrent connections at any given time. The os has to be up 24/7. Although the application might not be database query intensive, it does need to do a lot of physics.

I browsed through the features of RHEL AS and the servers it boasts seems to be easily installable into fedora core. Aside from technical support, where else does RHEL excel from fedora?

reddazz · 04-25-2005, 11:46 AM

RHEL is more stable than Fedora and has a longer release cycle.

paulr1984 · 04-25-2005, 01:16 PM

Shouldn't quicker updates be better than longer? Or are you referring to unstable applications integrated to fedora? Other than that, what else?

reddazz · 04-25-2005, 01:30 PM

RHEL is more stable application wise, because it undergoes extensive testing so that its packages are suitable for its enterprise class customers. Fedora sort of acts as test bed for RHEL, but is quite a good distro itself.

Boby · 04-25-2005, 01:34 PM

You can use WhiteBox Linux.

White Box fills niche between Fedora and RHEL

Boby

paulr1984 · 04-25-2005, 09:11 PM

ic. Are there applications which are exclusive to RHEL? Those which cannot be found or even installed in fedora?

reddazz · 04-26-2005, 02:52 AM

I don't think so. You can look at the package lists on the Redhat website.

ghight · 04-26-2005, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by paulr1984
ic. Are there applications which are exclusive to RHEL? Those which cannot be found or even installed in fedora?

No, but the other way around does apply. Of course what would you expect? Does RHEL really need an KDE mpeg player?

As far as clones go, I think Centos has a larger community base, hense more applications and a better, more polished product. Just my opinion though,...