We rely on the stability of rhel/centos as well. We have no patch/upgrade policy or regulatory directive to do so. Our servers are set and forget. We circle back for patch/upgrades only for break/fix.
I tried F19 just for the fun of it. We ended up with conflicts trying to run qemu-kvm with ceph. I could get one or the other working but not both. Our architecture is calling for compute and storage to live on the same host to save in hardware costs. I also tried to recompile libvirt and qemu-kvm today. I didn't even see rbd libraries in the source code. /C On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Dimitri Maziuk <dmaz...@bmrb.wisc.edu>wrote: > On 12/06/2013 04:28 PM, Alek Paunov wrote: > > On 07.12.2013 00:11, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > > >> 6 months lifecycle and having to os-upgrade your entire data center 3 > >> times a year? > >> > >> (OK maybe it's "18 months" and "once every 9 months") > > > > Most servers novadays are re-provisioned even more often, > > Not where I work they aren't. > > > Fedora release comes with more and more KVM/Libvirt features and > > resolved issues, so the net effect is positive anyway. > > Yes, that is the main argument for tracking ubuntu. ;) > > -- > Dimitri Maziuk > Programmer/sysadmin > BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
