Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 (RHEL 8.8) w/ support by Rinne Labs

I have experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) , using both the cloud-based and on-premises versions, with a focus on the on-premises deployment. As an infrastructure support engineer and senior manager, my main use cases include providing infrastructure for all applications and businesses. This encompasses user account management, application handling, and operating system requirements for each virtual machine. We are building and delivering products using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) , and we also utilize Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform  and Red Hat Satellite  for patching the operating system and other Red Hat applications.

We use a ton of operating systems in our environment. We have Red Hat flavors, CentOS , Ubuntu , and multiple Debian  versions. I have previously used AIX and Windows servers, with multiple versions of Windows as well. We maintain diversity in operating system usage.

Recently, we purchased Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) with support on a host-based license model. We previously used a per-host-wise license structure, but we opted for the highest license option, which provides unlimited virtual machines per host. The total investment was approximately 1.2 million dollars for around 1,100 hosts.

The purpose of this engagement was to gather survey information regarding Red Hat products and Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) operating system. I understand this will provide better insight into how Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) effectively targets customer inquiries.

The pros of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in comparison to other solutions I have used include that in most performance aspects, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is very robust and active in terms of performance, operating system strength, security, and lightweight efficiency.

The best features in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) include its open-source nature in terms of the Linux background and kernel. The enhancements and features offer various options with timely updates and security measures. You have multiple choices on how to control security and fix bugs. You can modify and tweak the kernel according to your convenience. If you need to perform automation of your own choice, modifications can be made to perform as per your requirements. This can be done in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) or any Linux-based operating system, but Windows has a ton of limitations. Even for bug fixes in Windows, you cannot announce fixes to others globally. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has an open-source community for this purpose, and CentOS  has similar benefits. For patching solutions, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has its own patching solution such as Satellite. There is also live patching available, including kernel live patching, which is an excellent option for minimal application downtime.

The most important security features in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) include the ability to control login access with multiple layers of security, such as two-factor authentication. Key-based authentication is one of the best options, and two-factor authentication is also beneficial. You can disable the root user, so normal users will not see or have access to system-secured commands unless they have sudo access. The kernel is much more secure, and most viruses do not affect the Linux kernel because all things are treated as files without extensions, which reduces virus impact in that area. Although any operating system can be vulnerable, Linux is less vulnerable than others.

I did not explore Red Hat Insights  much and do not have substantial knowledge about this feature.

Deployment is very easy and straightforward. I did not find any issues with it. Even with automation, it is very easy.

I would suggest that Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) improve the graphical user interface-based experience in a much better way. If you compare with most preferences, many people are more habituated with Windows. If Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) can improve the graphical user interface experience and gaming scope, it would benefit users. Windows handles gaming much better, but Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is more focused on the enterprise edition and server support. If Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) improves the graphical user interface experience, it would be better for users in terms of costing and user experience.

Another suggestion concerns Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform  support. I believe Red Hat should provide much better engineers who have greater experience with their product. Although they have knowledge bases and training programs, I feel that Indian engineers at Red Hat are not as effective or experienced with their own product. I have faced some challenges with support level in this area.

Regarding the centralized patching system, Red Hat Satellite  should support other operating systems beyond Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). I have observed that Red Hat Satellite has limitations and only supports Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Most organizations use multiple flavors of operating systems. Excluding Windows and considering only Linux operating systems such as Ubuntu , Debian , CentOS, or SUSE Linux, Red Hat Satellite should support these with a rollback option. If Red Hat Satellite includes support for other operating systems with guaranteed rollback functionality, customers would accept it very readily and would not even consider the price.

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for almost 11 years.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is much more stable in comparison to other operating systems. In terms of failures, sometimes no responses come and occasionally the system hangs up. However, the reasons for these issues are not particularly based on the operating system itself. Stability issues depend on memory and other applications running on the system. I cannot say that issues occur because of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) or Red Hat applications. I have not observed much issue or lagging from the operating system or Red Hat application perspective. We receive more than 99.99% uptime from the operating system perspective for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

Expansion is fine with no issues. The only limitation is that the XFS file system cannot be reduced. Any troubleshooting and expansion tasks are adopted smoothly.

In our environment, most of what we run is critical. Red Hat has their own service level agreement, and we have our technical account manager ready. Whenever there is any urgency, we connect with our technical account manager who helps us resolve the issue within our expected timeframe. It depends on the urgency, but when we request assistance, they fulfill it. Our experience has been very good with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) compared to other operating systems and original equipment manufacturers.

For any downtime, whether it is a priority one, priority two, or priority three case, their response time is one hour. They usually respond before that timeframe. I have faced some issues with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform support and did not see that much effectiveness, but regarding the operating system itself, the service has been very good. As I mentioned earlier, for kernel modification and hardening, Red Hat has provided good support.

I deployed Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) myself, and a third party also conducted deployments for us. I have my own hands-on experience in production environments with both manual and automation processes. We deployed Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) using Terraform  and other third-party tools. I used AWS Lambda  and many other tools to deploy Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) systems.

We purchased Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) directly from Red Hat through their verified vendors. Red Hat does not sell directly but works through their own verified vendors for purchases.

When you use the image builder, the custom image will be standardized and signed off by the original equipment manufacturer, which is Red Hat. When it is certified and signed off by Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), enterprises and auditors will accept it. If we create any custom images on our own, they will be standardized, but the image release will not be certified from the original equipment manufacturer. This can lead to many questions from auditors. However, when Red Hat signs off on the image, it is a good positive point to present to the auditor as evidence. My overall rating for this solution is 8 out of 10.

I work daily on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)  in my current field. I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)  as a daily task, including OS upgrade and patching activities.

What I like most about Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) is that it is very easy to handle and very user-friendly. As a non-technical person, I find it very easy to understand.

The documentation in Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) is very helpful for every issue. I have accessed the documentation multiple times, and it has helped me, especially when we are facing issues in OS upgrade and patching. Some steps are already mentioned in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) documentation, making it very easy to handle and solve the issues.

What I dislike about Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is that it has high-cost licensing, which makes it unaffordable for me to purchase a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) license myself.

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for the past three to four years.

I have not seen any instability in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), such as lagging or crashing.

I have had to contact the technical support of Red Hat multiple times, and I find that their support is very quick and instant and also provides an instant correct alternative solution. For Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) support, I would rate them 9 out of 10.

The installation of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is easy. I have already completed a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) installation, so it was straightforward for me.

I have not used any alternatives to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

I have been using Leapp in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). The maintenance does require updates on my end, and our company takes care of that. I would rate this review 9 out of 10.

I am currently working on dialing up telecom services that are due to telecommunication needs in Sri Lanka. We are using this for mother data center activities, not only as a solution but for multiple purposes. I am currently handling the data engineering team.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) , we are testing. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)  ten point one is also there in beta. In that manner, Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) does a couple of things. We are the partner of Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) in our dialogue at the digital lab.

At the moment, we are using ten. Because we use it most of the time for the test bed, which is the development bed, ten is at the moment our version.

The main thing as a cloud-based solution is valuable. Beyond that, it is an on-premises solution. We are also using a stable established version called nine point two from Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). We are supposed to move to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) as well.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is paid. When it comes to the total Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) management, they are using project insight for part of the services. We will take that Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Insight.

That is really helpful. It is a kind of dashboard, not only a dashboard. We can get decision-making capabilities going forward when it comes to security.

OpenShift gives a good solution for us on the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) end. The session, not only the station, has the CI/CD pipeline and operators connecting. That is a really good improvement on the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) side.

Sometimes we are lagging in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) part because we have to deploy in non-straightforward environments. Some environments have third party deployments where party enhancement happened.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is lagging in these scenarios. The main problem we are facing is the cost factor. Because it comes to long and short terms, stakeholders do not want to move to a good business solution because of the cost factor. That is still where we are lagging.

I have been using this solution for more than industrial use, more than fifteen years, almost twenty.

I think that now, as of just now, there is no downside. It is not crashing, basically. The application is rebooting every time because of some kind of bug.

You have to master the tips and then come to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). The knowledge base is actually lagging because most of the people do not want to work with the backend coding and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). We are commanded to use it to upgrade anything.

Because of that knowledge gap and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in Manam, but people are not using much more. Even administrators are not using proper principles and guidelines to do so.

When I was in the consumer space, I realized console R is also more toward Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) kernel. Exadata and now Oracle are all moving to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) because of the kernel quality.

It will help a lot. When it comes to big data development, we have twenty servers to deploy with all kinds of packages and modules. Then it will easily deploy using the Ansible  playbook to write the code and everything. So it is easier to deploy, actually.

It is an integrator, basically. It is cloud and cloud enablement because I had experiences when we were going to do that Cloudera migration.

That is really helpful now when it comes to the integration point of view. That is Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) too, I believe.

Then we are going to do some implementation. They are aligned with the Dell partners. Those kinds of matters come up because of the cost. This comparison comes to the picture.

When it comes to the backup solution, we are using tune the profile to utilize the backup solution. When we are using performance stack, we have tuned the performance stack to do a couple of testing in production as well. That is the main thing we are basically using most of the time.

Our engineers are supposed to do that base. Now they are implementing that base. I carry it forward to the next level, which is the business solution. When we are seeing Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Insight, we can take the next action as much as the next action method allows. For instance, when we say we want to patch the environment, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) we are testing. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) ten point one is also there in beta. In that manner, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) does a couple of things. We are the partner of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in our dialogue at the digital lab.

Next year, I will recommend Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) because they have a lot of features and functions, especially for the enhancements. When it comes to security, now they have a lot of features. For instance, saving us is a really good enhancement way to achieve the environment. When it comes to the use of solution, that is really interesting.

I am using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for almost fifteen years now. I really understand what Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) did then and what kind of solutions they provide. Accordingly, I am aligned and most of the time when I say I am going to do some kind of upgrade, I definitely use that release and knowledge, principle, and guidelines. Otherwise, we cannot do it. I have given this review a rating of ten out of ten.

I am a RHCE certified and RHCSA certified professional. I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)  to deploy the OS for node provisioning across any make of clusters. I work with the HPC cluster team and receive clusters on RHEL-based systems. Over the last seven years, I have been working with RHEL  7, RHEL 8, RHEL 9, and currently RHEL 10. I primarily work with HPC clusters.

Since creating HPC clusters is not part of my responsibilities, I focus mainly on installation, node provisioning, password management, SSH proxies, and NGINX  and web server configuration.

There are several valuable features I appreciate. I can obtain any versions, software, or RPM packages easily through the subscription manager or without it. Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) is very hands-on for me and runs smoothly. It even runs on just 1 GB of RAM, which is excellent for my needs. The installation process is very easy compared to other distributions. Since I work with clusters, this simplicity is invaluable.

When comparing the installation process of Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) to other distributions, I find that a non-technical person can easily follow the prompts. The installation guides are clear and documented step-by-step. For example, the first prompt asks for language, keyboard, and installation preferences, and each step is straightforward. In contrast, Ubuntu  and other distributions require creating disks and involve more complex UI elements that are not as user-friendly. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has a clean interface that allows even non-technical people to install the OS easily.

I have only studied from the direct books provided by Red Hat for RHCSA and RHCE certification, and every detail is available in their documentation and website. I appreciate the clean and detailed information provided in their resources.

I encounter pain points when trying to add patches for certain versions I need for RHEL purposes. While creating HPC clusters on RHEL 9, I sometimes need EPEL repositories for RHEL 7 or 8. Adding patches from these repositories is very painful because Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 9 does not easily support these older package versions. This is a recurring problem I always face.

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) since I started my career, which is 6.7 years.

I have not experienced stability issues. I have used multiple OEMs including HP, Dell, Exatron, and NVIDIA servers. I always prefer recommending Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to my customers because it is very stable. I have only experienced one server crash in all my years, and that was due to an OEM issue, not Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) itself. I have never encountered data problems or server crashes from Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

Scalability is not an issue. I can easily add more nodes to clusters. The installation is very fast, which allows me to scale quickly. I use Ansible  and PXE servers to facilitate this process, and I can scale to many servers very quickly with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

When I was working for a customer and faced an issue while installing a package, I requested Red Hat support and they helped me resolve it.

I have raised requests in the morning around 11:00 AM and received responses within one to two hours. They ask for logs and version information, and then provide a response within approximately 30 minutes. I give Red Hat support a nine out of 10 rating. I would give a full 10 if they could push their support to be slightly faster. When someone is on-site conducting installations and encounters an issue, that person needs to wait at least one or two hours for a response. Red Hat could improve by responding a bit more quickly.

Regarding the pricing of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) subscription, I believe the pricing is fair. The support that Red Hat provides is very good. Whenever I encounter issues, Red Hat always provides fast resolution. The pricing is justified given the quality of support offered.

I have used Ubuntu  as an alternative distribution. However, I always choose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) over every other distribution. I started my career learning from Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), which is the main reason I prefer it. Additionally, Ubuntu and other distributions have many dependencies that require adding different packages and configurations. When troubleshooting on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), I find solutions easily. With Ubuntu, troubleshooting requires digging much deeper.

I have been working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for approximately seven years.

Regarding updates and maintenance, I only need maintenance time when upgrading the OS. When upgrading the kernel version or transitioning from RHEL 8 to RHEL 9, I only need to install the RPMs and reboot the server once. Maintenance primarily involves patching and the subsequent reboot requirement.

Every time a cluster issue occurs, Red Hat never requests high downtime or suggests data loss scenarios. They maintain very low risk and require very low downtime.

I work with both the cloud version and the on-premises version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) . I have worked with Red Hat Cloud and Red Hat Enterprise on-premises.

For the cloud-based products, the main use cases for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)  include deploying websites and complex software for customers, such as SaaS software on the cloud, specifically Red Hat Cloud.

When choosing Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) in the cloud, security requirements were not a consideration for me because Red Hat provides us with the SLA regarding security compliance. I am more than satisfied to use Red Hat Cloud for security purposes, while I manage some other forms of security, such as my own keys and access in Red Hat Linux systems.

I really appreciate the zero trust networking that Red Hat Enterprise Linux  (RHEL) has, and it also provides the WAF , along with certified images from Red Hat. For my current work on containers, Red Hat provides certified images that minimize vulnerabilities of CVEs, improving security significantly.

Although I do not have much knowledge about virtualization technology, I can say that for the hybrid cloud on OpenShift with the operators provided by Red Hat, the ready-to-use operators take care of underlying security, patching, and updates, so I do not have to handle monitoring or security myself.

Security is highlighted as an advantage across various aspects, such as the zero trust networking feature and the availability of certified images, which are instrumental in minimizing vulnerabilities and enhancing security.

While there are good aspects, I would appreciate improvements in the command-line interface (CLI). Red Hat could do more on the CLI side instead of focusing so much on UI development.

I have been working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for around five years.

Regarding stability, I have not experienced performance issues, crashes, or downtimes with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL); any problems usually arise from my applications, not from the Linux system.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is definitely scalable.

Whether I have expanded the usage of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) depends on the business requirements, as RHEL comes with a cost that my company can afford because IBM owns Red Hat, so everything scales on RHEL.

Regarding my experience with Red Hat's technical support team, I find that they come very quickly with answers. However, sometimes the first person who responds might be a technical support agent without in-depth knowledge, so for more complex issues, a specialized engineer comes to the rescue, depending on the criticality of the subject, especially if it is production or a staging environment. They answer according to the SLA and support terms.

Determining whether Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is cost-effective depends entirely on the business. If your business faces compromises leading to significant losses, then investing in Red Hat Enterprise is truly necessary. However, if your business is small or medium-sized, you can manage with the free versions.

Regarding the deployment aspect, my experience has been straightforward because it is all automated with Ansible ; all I need to do is provide an IP address, and it takes care of all the variables and boots up automatically.

Regarding the pricing, setup costs, and licensing costs of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), I have heard that the licensing cost is significant compared to free alternatives such as CentOS  or AlmaLinux , which are managed by Red Hat. I previously used CentOS , which is free, but I had to manage everything, including security, patching, reboots, and storage.

The key differences between Red Hat and other Linux technologies I have used include the advantages of excellent technical support, good documentation, and a large community for problem-solving. A disadvantage is that it is not open source, meaning limited flexibility, and the high cost associated with Red Hat compared to others.

I would advise other organizations considering Red Hat to start using it as their applications grow larger, rather than waiting for their business to become huge, as delays can lead to complications.

Currently, I am working on bare-metal services where I install Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Using AWS  for Red Hat is indeed a good option, as you can get the image directly from AWS  with a subscription cost per hour for Red Hat licensing.

Red Hat helps keep applications operational because it provides built-in monitoring tools that offer a good overview of all running services, including built-in agents that come with the Red Hat subscription to identify potential breakouts. Regarding reducing risks, Red Hat also provides secure images that indicate the latest security patches available worldwide.

The knowledge base offered by Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is excellent; the documentation is fantastic and is supported by a large community that answers questions effectively.

When comparing the business value of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to other Linux distributions, I find that RHEL is more stringent with its security, requiring users to be careful not to trespass, whereas other Linux systems do not enforce such strict security measures, and users must manage security themselves.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) overall as a product and solution at eight, possibly eight and a half.