Rocky 10 (Rocky Linux 10) | Support by SupportedImages

As a Cloud Ops Engineer, we are setting up the server on the EC2  machine with Rocky Linux , while also doing some setup related to the frameworks for Ruby. We are installing their dependencies related to the Ruby on Rails application and other security-level software such as Rapid7, CrowdStrike, and many more.

On Rocky Linux , we have deployed a Ruby on Rails application, and we have set up other applications as well.

We are not doing this stuff manually, as we have set up an Ansible  automation script to set up all this stuff on Rocky Linux, and for the installation and server setup, we are using Terraform . Using Terraform , we are spinning up the instance on AWS  EC2 .

I purchased Rocky Linux through the AWS Marketplace .

Rocky Linux provides us with extended maintenance, security patches, and support lifecycle aligned with RHEL , making it highly reliable for critical systems. For production deployment, Rocky Linux is a great choice because it offers full RHEL  compatibility without licensing costs, along with strong community support.

If we are planning to migrate from CentOS , it was very smooth and straightforward, and we can follow their official document to migrate from CentOS  to Rocky Linux. Rocky Linux 8 is supported until 2029, and Rocky Linux 9 is supported until 2032, which is a significant benefit.

Previously it was CentOS, which is already EOL, and now we have the latest packages and an up-to-date operating system, so we get the most benefit at the security level. Also, performance-wise, we are seeing improvement in the application and day-to-day operations.

I have no suggestions regarding how Rocky Linux can be improved. I haven't identified any areas that need improvement yet.

I have been using Rocky Linux for over a year.

Rocky Linux is stable in my experience.

Rocky Linux's scalability is very easy. Even if the server is not responding and we want to attach the volume on another instance or a temporary instance, it is very easy and straightforward with no hiccups.

I have not reached out to customer support for Rocky Linux. This has not yet been discussed with my security team, as this is recent, and the security team started checking on this.

Negative

We switched to Rocky Linux because our previous OS was EOL, and we had to switch to the new OS, so we chose Rocky Linux.

Regarding return on investment, we have chosen the same exact resource that we were using earlier, so there is no immediate return on investment. That needs to be identified if we can cut down our resources with a smaller instance, but that has not yet been figured out.

I notice money saved as a return on investment.

There is no extra cost for a license if we are purchasing Rocky Linux from the AWS Marketplace .

I didn't evaluate other options before choosing Rocky Linux.

I rate Rocky Linux a nine out of ten.

If you are using any other RHEL-based OS, Rocky Linux is very similar to other RHEL operating systems.

I see some performance-related issues, but we are still checking on that, and we don't know if it is related to the OS or the resource; that is something still to be checked from our end.

I would recommend doing a POC on your existing application or use case with Rocky Linux. If it works smoothly, then observe it for a few periods, and if it works properly for your application and whatever your use case is, proceed with implementation. Each application and use case works totally differently, so if it works for some applications properly, it's not a given that it will work for every application. First do a POC, and if it works properly, then you can proceed with implementation.

My main use case for Rocky Linux  is that we had some web servers that we used as internal web servers on a LAMP stack with Nginx for some internal websites and systems. At the time, they ran on CentOS , but we felt it would be better to migrate them to Rocky Linux . I remember we had a script to migrate those servers and it worked very well. Since then, I have left the company, but my colleagues who are still there are using it with no problems so far.

In my opinion, the best features Rocky Linux offers are stability, compatibility, and community support, all of which I think are extremely necessary and essential for the distribution, and I find that all three pillars are very supported by Rocky Linux.

The big difference was the compatibility, one-to-one compatibility, and packages and repos, and that was the main thing that helped us significantly after all.

Rocky Linux has positively impacted my organization, specifically through cost savings, because we did not have to buy any licenses or extra licenses of other distros, such as Oracle or Red Hat, and that helped significantly, giving us independence in this project without needing a budget specifically for it. This helped tremendously.

I cannot think of anything right now that could improve Rocky Linux. I think they should keep up the great job.

I have been using Rocky Linux on and off since its first release, right after CentOS  changed its releases and both Rocky Linux and Alma started.

Rocky Linux is stable.

For my case, Rocky Linux's scalability has been very good.

I have not had any experience with customer support so far because I usually research things on my own, and the documentation and community help significantly in those cases.

Positive

We previously used CentOS, and we switched because their release politics were not really going into the stable way that we always thought CentOS was praised for, which is why we chose to migrate.

I decided to migrate those web servers specifically to Rocky Linux instead of another option because I actually tried both distributions, Alma and Rocky Linux, and I believe that the one that was most similar to how we used CentOS was Rocky Linux. This was the best choice after all.

If I recall correctly, I had some problems during the migration process, but it was not with Rocky Linux; it was with AlmaLinux  installation. That was one of the main factors as because we had some bugs. Rocky Linux was a very good choice in the end and it is working efficiently.

I have seen a return on investment because our team was very small and is still small in overall support in the company. One good thing is that we did not have to contract any other team member specifically for the migration since everyone was already well-versed with CentOS. This should count as a point, and while I do not have exact metrics of expenses, I believe it saved around some thousands of dollars for the company.

I did not have any experience with pricing because we used mainly the free version of Rocky Linux at the time.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, I evaluated other options such as AlmaLinux , and if I recall correctly, we also researched Red Hat.

I would advise others looking into using Rocky Linux to try it out, especially if they have servers on CentOS, as it is very valid for an upgrade. I know a lot of CentOS servers have already reached the end-of-life state, with no more updates or security updates, so I would recommend a migration to Rocky Linux. I rate Rocky Linux 10 out of 10.

I am responsible for virtualization and networking, and other services related to the systems including Linux and Windows, but the security part is actually the responsibility of the French team in our headquarter.

Currently, I am dealing with Linux systems. We were on Red Hat Enterprise Linux  and because of the license system, we have changed to use Rocky Linux  and AlmaLinux .

Rocky Linux  is suitable for our needs. We haven't specialized applications, just managing our network. Here  we construct a model of infrastructure independent which must respond to the needs of our client, and we make tests. These are tests for VBS and some electronics that are made and developed here. It's an experimental infrastructure with many dynamic changes and many needs from our project manager. With our team, we can provide support as needed. We have a very good team with high skills in Linux and development, and it works correctly with no enterprise cost or enterprise license. At the same time, we have to conform to ISO 27001. We try to have the latest patch management, and we try to use some open source centralized platforms to manage or supervise what we have.

We are using Rocky Linux on servers including Cisco UCS M5, M4, and we have some Dells 750, 740, with high-performance computing tasks. We have stronger servers.

Rocky Linux is quite good for us and for the nature of our business. By using Foreman, Katello, for example, the management system and repository for patch management is very quiet and very good for our business because we don't need more.

Until now, we haven't had any problems with integration of Rocky Linux with other products in my system.

We haven't needed technical support for Rocky Linux, but I think because of the complexity and the number of VMs that we have, we can consider going for a support contract. It's not a bad idea because, while we haven't encountered very difficult problems, with the complexity of the network infrastructure, we need to be supported by the editor.

If I find something which is strong with virtualization with Rocky Linux, it's an alternative that I can study and spend time learning about, trying it, making tests, validating, and perhaps ultimately migrating.

We haven't implemented Rocky Linux container management yet, but we have an idea to find an alternative solution to VMware because of the license model. To migrate to a solution, we need to improve our skills for the first step, and for the second step, we must be able to support the developer teams. What I'm sure about is that we are looking for a solution for virtualization in order to migrate our VMware platform.

One year ago, we switched to version 9.4, Alma and Rocky Linux, and now we are on 9.5.

I cannot answer how Rocky Linux frequent updates have aided our organization in staying secure because it's not under my responsibility, but what I am sure about is that in the next three years, we will continue to use Linux.

I cannot judge if Rocky Linux is complex to use for the first time or if it is intuitive because we use very simple applications such as DHCP, DNS, ICS. I don't remember encountering any difficulties because the infrastructure is for tests and is not an enterprise infrastructure. We haven't deployed LDAP or Active Directory. We don't have this kind of complexity or mail servers. For storage, we are using the Dell EMC storage device hardware, Unity. We don't have the complexity to communicate with Rocky Linux or other systems with our storage network. Perhaps in the future, we might meet some difficulties, which is why I said it might be a good idea to have support for Rocky Linux.

The initial setup of Rocky Linux is easy. It's well done. For my team, we haven't found any problems in the first initial setup. We work with an image with which we can reconstruct what we need of the virtual component.

We were a customer of Red Hat for Linux distribution. We studied Rocky Linux and learned from documentation and information on the internet. It's the successor of CentOS , which we used for five to seven years. When CentOS  reached end of support, we tried to migrate. We got two alternatives, AlmaLinux  and Rocky Linux. It seems that Rocky Linux is more similar to CentOS than AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux is based on binary, and we identified some latency when using our application. Two or three servers are working on AlmaLinux currently, and all the rest was migrated to Rocky Linux.

The initial setup of Rocky Linux is easy. It's well done. For my team, we haven't found any problems in the first initial setup. We work with an image with which we can reconstruct what we need of the virtual component.

I would rate Rocky Linux seven or eight as a minimum.

We switched to Rocky Linux because of the license price, and in our business, we don't need to have a higher cost as that is not a good idea.

We studied Rocky Linux through documentation and information on the internet. It's the successor of CentOS, which we used for five to seven years. When CentOS reached end of support, we tried to migrate. We got two alternatives, AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. Rocky Linux is more similar to CentOS than AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux is based on binary, and we identified some latency when using our application. Two or three servers are working on AlmaLinux currently, and all the rest was migrated to Rocky Linux.

I cannot understand the meaning of the question regarding whether we purchased Rocky Linux and AlmaLinux on the AWS Marketplace  or somewhere else. I am not sure if we bought our current products on AWS Marketplace .

The problem with all products now is the manner of licensing. Even international or worldwide enterprises have difficulties with the cost of the new model of license in Cisco, Red Hat, and VMware. After the Broadcom acquisition of VMware, every time we ask for a budget, we have difficulties getting what we need. It's becoming difficult for enterprises. Even though I'm working for Sagemcom, a worldwide enterprise, they don't want to spend money on this kind of license if it is not needed.

Rocky Linux is popular in my region as it's a successor of CentOS. CentOS was very popular, so everybody that used CentOS and lost the support will look for a solution to substitute it. The nearest alternative to CentOS is Rocky Linux.

I would rate Rocky Linux a 7 out of 10.

I have been using Rocky Linux  for three or four years. It is used for HPC, online assessments, and Ceph  storage.

The solution is free and open source.

The OS choice in my project is quite specific. It is based on customer requirements, as they might want to use Rocky Linux  or Ubuntu , depending on their needs.

The package versions can be quite older compared to other distributions such as Ubuntu .

I have been using this solution for about three or four years.

The deployment process is simple.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The scalability is quite good, though there are some issues with Rocky Linux. I would rate the scalability a five out of seven.

I rely on self-support and community resources.

Positive

I previously used VirtualBox but now tend to use Proxmox.

The initial setup is simple.

It involves a normal setup process using a USB drive or network installation.

It requires a plain installation. The server can be set up with UI, similar to a desktop installation in an on-premises environment.

I use Rocky Linux on the production server first. For Ubuntu installations, it depends on customer requirements.

The package management system requires attention when working with Rocky Linux.

There can be some issues with scalability that need consideration.

I would rate Rocky Linux an eight out of ten.

The platform's ease of setup, reliability, and minimal maintenance are valuable features. The custom install scripts streamline the setup process, making it straightforward.

Improved integration with Windows, particularly Active Directory, would be beneficial for the product. Currently, this aspect requires additional effort.

I have been working with Rocky Linux for approximately 18 months, which aligns with its release timeline. We are currently using version 9.4 of the solution.

The product is stable and reliable. I rate the stability a nine. 

Approximately 40 to 50 customers are using the solution. Most of our on-premises servers run Linux, with some running multiple instances. I would rate the scalability as a nine. It performs very well in scaling scenarios.

I have not utilized official technical support and have relied on community resources and forums.

The setup is straightforward, with minimal manual intervention. Depending on the customer's requirements, it is deployed on cloud-based systems or on-premises hardware. 

The deployment typically takes about an hour. Virtual machines can be set up in this timeframe, with additional time needed for specific customer configurations.

I rate the process a nine and a half. 

The product is expensive. I rate the pricing a three. 

The solution allows us to quickly set up multiple virtual machines, reducing costs and requiring less management than other systems.

 It is a robust solution for various server needs. I rate it a nine.