On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 11:36, Yasha Karant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> We are obtaining a new GPU cluster research compute engine, Nvidia CUDA 4
> conforming.  Because of the way the funding agency evaluates proposals, we
> effectively had to use an integrator who is well respected in the community
> associated with the particular funding source.
>
> Speaking with the professional staff at the integrator, it appears that the
> consensus is that RHEL 6 is not really ready for production, and that
> production engines are being kept on RHEL 5.6 (CentOS 5.6, SL 5.6).  When I
> enquired about SUSE Enterprise current, I received similar comments from the
> same source.  It was noted that RHEL 6 was withdrawn for a while after
> production release.  Does anyone reading this list have any observations on
> the production stability of RHEL 6?

I am sorry but the question is rather nebulous to answer. What is your
value of production ready? What is your integrators? What criteria do
you use for evaluation of that production readiness. It is an N
parameter non-linear equation with different answers on what those
criteria are.

I know integrators who only are now trusting RHEL-4 for their projects
now that it is reaching end of life. There are large sites running
RHEL-6 to render movies and various scientific clustering items but
they each have different reasons for their choices and each considers
it "production stability."

So unless you define what one means by production stability, the
question is unanswerable.

> This question is irrespective of new hardware support in RHEL 6 that may not
> be operational (e.g., USB 3, nominally in RHEL 6.1).
>
> Yasha Karant
>



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren