Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for AWS

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is used primarily from a server perspective, running numerous applications on top of the Enterprise Linux server. This includes in-house applications, client-based applications, and integrations with Active Directory, LDAP, and databases that sit outside but are integrated with the Enterprise Linux servers. Over 8000 Linux machines are running across VMware, physical servers, and AWS instances.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) operates in a complete hybrid environment with machines running on physical servers, VMware, and Azure instances. Red Hat OpenShift serves as the private cloud product and runs on production and QA environments with a 32-node cluster and a 16-node cluster containing 16 worker nodes running Red Hat CoreOS, which is a customized operating system provided by Red Hat.

My experience is primarily on the Red Hat side, though I also work with multiple integrations including Active Directory, LDAP, Grafana, Dynatrace, and Prometheus. I use DataDog and Dynatrace for log monitoring. I currently work with several cloud platforms including GCP, AWS, Azure, and IBM, running Enterprise Linux and OpenShift on IBM cloud, Azure, and AWS where they offer managed services such as Red Hat OpenShift on AWS (ROSA) and Azure Red Hat OpenShift (ARO).

Compared to other technologies and products, I have not identified any cons for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), but I see many advantages. By using Red Hat OpenShift, resource consumption has been reduced significantly compared to what was consumed on Red Hat Enterprise Linux servers. Previously, a few applications ran on one RHEL server, but after moving to OpenShift, those applications were containerized and now run as containers on the OpenShift environment, reducing resource consumption by more than 80%.

Regarding time-saving aspects, using the Ansible configuration management automation tool saves considerable time. It allows me to automate multiple repetitive tasks instead of deploying everything manually, which can be quite repetitive.

To mitigate downtime and lower risks, changes are made during off-business hours to minimize business impact, often working during weekends or outside business hours. New upgrades are tested first in development and QA environments before being applied to production after receiving feedback.

Over more than a decade, I have found many improvements in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), especially in the last 10 years. Red Hat enterprise services continually introduce new features such as Broadcom host cover for VMware. Red Hat recently introduced OpenShift migration, allowing existing servers to be migrated from VMware or elsewhere directly to the Red Hat platform or OpenShift through virtualization, which is a unique technology that Red Hat has provided to the industry.

From a security standpoint, the most important security features in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are the built-in security features already in place. Red Hat has recently introduced the Lightweight feature, which is in high demand in the market because it allows for customizable security options.

I have tried both Leapp and Red Hat Insights depending on client demand. Sometimes I prefer one, but if the client is not ready for that option, I must proceed with what they prefer.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Image Builder is my primary tool for this work. Most clients want to customize their images rather than use standard ones provided with the ISO. When clients prefer certain elements to remain while requesting the removal of others, the Image Builder is used to meet their specifications.

One improvement I would like to see in technical support and customer service is that sometimes the technical team asks random questions. When a priority ticket has been raised and immediate responses are needed, they keep asking for repeated information, which feels like a strategy to buy time and can be quite frustrating.

Aside from support improvements, I currently do not have anything else in mind that I would like to see enhanced in Red Hat. One crucial missing feature regarding security is something I would like to see enhanced. Red Hat has great potential in this area, and they recently presented the Lightwell tool, which I am currently exploring and look forward to sharing my experience with.

I have been working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux for 18 years.

In terms of stability and reliability, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is stable.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is scalable. Specifically, in the OpenShift area where I have worked for the last ten years, the environment can be scaled up and down at any time.

I would rate the knowledge base offered by Red Hat at 9 out of 10. The Red Hat knowledge base contains all the information needed for newcomers looking to explore their career in Red Hat. All documentation is available, and if you are good at reading or connecting the dots, you can utilize it without help from third parties.

My use of Red Hat in a hybrid environment is supported by the premium model, which provides all kinds of support. Most of my clients run Enterprise Linux servers in production environments, so the premium support option is typically used.

Red Hat helps solve many specific pain points, especially when stuck on a production issue and unable to find the root cause. In those moments, reaching out to Red Hat with a priority one support case results in immediate response and assistance.

I would rate the technical support team a 7 out of 10.

The initial setup process with Red Hat is not overly complex unless customized applications are involved, which Red Hat does not support directly. This is the only challenge encountered, as their support is limited to their own products rather than customized ones.

In terms of cost-effectiveness, this completely depends on what is being used and what the business needs are. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) does bring a return on investment, but it varies based on those factors.

It depends on the client and the relationship they have with Red Hat. Sometimes, Red Hat offers significant discounts to clients running extensive environments with hundreds of Enterprise Linux servers and services such as Ansible and OpenShift.

Most of the time, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is procured directly from Red Hat rather than from other marketplaces.

When comparing the business value of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) against other Linux distributions I have used, RHEL is prioritized for running business applications. Although some customers choose to use SUSE or Fedora, for production applications, Red Hat Enterprise Linux is the preferred choice.

I currently represent a Center of Excellence (COE) for Red Hat OpenShift, maintaining a business relationship with Red Hat.

For others looking to implement Red Hat technologies, my recommendation is significant. Since the Broadcom takeover, companies seem to be moving away from VMware virtualization to Red Hat OpenShift or Red Hat Virtualization, with many preferring OpenShift for migrating existing workloads to containerized formats.

I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for administration, automation scripts, storage, and Docker containers. My workloads include general workloads and virtualization across various environments.

I implement hardening practices and ensure compliance with PCI DSS and NIST standards. My deployment is on-premises in a private cloud environment.

Our environment is air-gapped and isolated from the internet. My journey with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) includes administration, storage, services, and systemd service management.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is an excellent product. It is very easy to use, useful, and delivers strong performance and security with freedom and customization options.

The security environment maintenance is important to me. The product is quite easy to work with.

The upgrade and migration processes are wonderful and easy. Migration is a smooth process that depends on the migration workloads and the specific application systems involved.

I use Image Builder primarily for upgrading Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) versions when I am using leap. I use this tool every day. The product is very complex yet very friendly and easy to understand.

I would like to see improvements in automation scripts, vulnerabilities detection and resolution, and intrusion detection capabilities.

I have used Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for six years.

I experience very reduced and low stability issues. I encounter less than one hour of downtime in a year.

Scalability is easy to manage.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) customer service has been responsive.

The initial setup involves easy steps and is very friendly. The deployment is fast for running.

I have achieved a 40% return on investment through money and time savings. The time savings is more important than the monetary savings.

My managers consider the setup cost to be very expensive.

Other Red Hat-based alternatives include Oracle, Rocky Linux, and AlmaLinux. Red Hat and Oracle are better and recommended for enterprise use due to their resources and features, which are more interesting for enterprise deployments.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is friendly compared to alternatives. Key differentiating features include Ksplice and Ktrace.

I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 10 out of 10 points. The product excels in performance, security, ease of change management, reliability, availability, and serviceability, which are very important for administration. The tools available, support guides, forums, and community support are valuable resources.

I am using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) on a document management system, services server lines, and to build these applications.

Regarding lifecycle practices in the cloud, I am using two applications on-premises and a few are on Docker containers.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) saves me around 60% on time. With regard to downtime, I can lower downtime by about two to three minutes.

Regarding pain points, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) does not help me solve any specific issues.

The biggest advantage of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is that it is easily available and easily manageable. The support cases are more readily used and the online local support is available.

With regard to the management part, when it comes to provisioning and patching, I can do patching and management on my own. I see that there is no difference between on-premises and cloud solutions; both are similar and it depends on conditions and the way the structure is organized. This is why I have no issues with on-premises or hybrid cloud deployments.

I find that integration with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is easy, as I am using it with Oracle.

Regarding disadvantages in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), the certification cost is a concern for me. The problem with the certification is that its price is high, and it needs to be minimal for countries like Pakistan.

About the knowledge base that Red Hat offers, I feel it needs to improve session offerings more. This is especially important for junior beginners.

I have around three to four years of experience using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

Regarding scalability, I am satisfied. The services are easily available and scalable as per the need.

My experience with Red Hat support is that it is very helpful. If I had to rate support from zero to ten points, I would give it a nine because everything is solved.

Regarding deployment strategy, I find it quite simple. Regarding the upgrades and migration process from on-premises to the cloud, I have to first create a setup on a test machine, then upgrade, and after that, go live.

Regarding return on investment, I see value for money with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) saves me almost 60%. The saving I speak of is on both time and money.

When choosing Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), our security requirement was that I am using it on IBM Power servers, which offered a bundle price. That is why I opted for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Regarding the price, I think the license is a little bit expensive nowadays, but I have opted for six years in a bundle offer. That is why I am using it at a cheaper price.

In comparing Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to other Linux distributions, I find Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to be more stable than compared to others in terms of performance, storage, and security. Although other distributors are more secure, as part of my choice, I choose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

When I have it on the cloud, I work with a local provider rather than a native Red Hat Cloud or cloud providers like AWS, Azure, or GCP. I have not tried Image Builder of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) at this time. I would give Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a rating of nine points.

I mostly use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for security purposes, conducting security testing, cyber security testing, and general administration purposes, including maintaining accounts.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) offers extensive customization options that I can tailor to my specific needs. I love the customizability and adaptability.

The knowledge base offered by Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is quite comprehensive and vast. I search through it and use AI to resolve any queries I have.

The most important security feature in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is the excellent administration policy regarding which user can access which file and what type of permissions I can assign. I appreciate this as a local IAM system.

The IAM feature is most valuable for us because we have around 200 to 300 users, and it can be difficult to track which people have what type of privileges. This feature provides a very neat and detailed view of the privileges that people are assigned.

I would like to see improvements in the CLI, making it somewhat easier instead of the complicated commands that are currently used. Keeping it simple and easy to remember would be beneficial.

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

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is very stable.

Regarding scalability, I find Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to be quite scalable and does not require much time for scaling.

The only concern is the costing when it comes to cloud instances.

I have never escalated any questions to the technical support or customer service teams regarding Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

I have not used any different product for operating systems before.

The initial setup process for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) was straightforward.

I completed the setup and deployment myself.

The business value of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is quite high. It provides excellent availability and never crashes. The machine performs reliably when I need it, resulting in very few downtimes.

Regarding the pricing aspect of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), I mostly use free resources and have not procured any license. I prefer to use open-source options and maintain my own set of rules.

With the open-source nature of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), the measurable benefits I have seen are primarily cost benefits. It is highly customizable and saves considerable time because I do not need to explain what I want to anyone; I simply conduct research and implement those features into my instances.

I chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) because I am familiar with it and receive good updates and security updates.

I have not worked with LEAP or Red Hat Insights yet.

I have mostly worked with Red Hat Enterprise Linux Image Builder and System Roles. System Roles have been helpful for me as I started using them recently. I previously limited some resources in my systems by using only a specific percentage of available hardware resources and reducing bloatware, which involves resource controlling.

I have never tried Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in a hybrid environment. I mostly connect to some instances in the cloud through SSH but have never used hybrid solutions.

Until now, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has not helped me solve specific pain points, except for using the command line terminal and assigning many different permissions to accomplish one task.

The controlled updates and patches save a lot for me regarding Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

From a features perspective, there are no missing features that I would see included in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in the future.

I obtained Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) directly from Red Hat. My overall review rating for this product is 9.

I primarily use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for network administration.

I wonder if you tried either Leapp or Red Hat Insights. I don't know exactly, but I don't think we went that deep into it because there were some specific sets of instructions we used to run every time.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) helped to mitigate downtime and lower risks, and I would say it's above average.

Sometimes there are new rollouts or features, or if I am exploring something new in support, I basically face problems where it's difficult for me to educate newcomers, interns, or new entrants to get accustomed to these things because it's an entirely new environment and new platform compared to what we have been using here in our country and in our organizations. If I am using Microsoft for certain things, it's mostly graphic based, but in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), it's mostly very command-line specific.

I think that if sometimes there are certain solutions where the support team with some specific technical personnel could remotely assist using TeamViewer or something similar to solve specific issues, then I think it could be much faster.

I think the commercial rollout of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) could improve because this is a very specific kind of product that isn't commercial in nature. If there is some kind of integration with commercial customers and it is used more frequently in everyday life, along with improved graphic interfaces, capacity building, training platforms, or webinars, then I think we can extend the market, have more users, and receive more accurate feature-based feedback from them.

I used Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for almost two years or longer.

Technical support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) was definitely good. Sometimes if we were stuck and needed troubleshooting or were trying to perform some function that wasn't happening, it was satisfactory. I can rate their technical support at least eight.

I was using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) personally for my own use. I am no longer using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). I switched from Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) almost one year ago.

The initial setup of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) was initially complex.

Sometimes there are new rollouts or features, or if I am exploring something new in support, I basically face problems where it's difficult for me to educate newcomers, interns, or new entrants to get accustomed to these things because it's an entirely new environment and new platform compared to what we have been using here in our country and in our organizations.

I would like to understand what my experience was with the pricing of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and whether I find it reasonable and competitive.

I think we purchased Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) from a third party, from some other vendor.

I have multiple experiences working in this field. Initially, I was a network administrator, focusing on networking, mainly in routing and switching. I worked with internet service providers, so I have experience with a NOC and service provider solutions in that regard, particularly dealing with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for network administration.

I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for servers as well as workstations.

Our site has around 3,000 workstations that our developers are building our software on. For servers (~1000), we are using it for self-hosting tools required for software development and testing.

Furthermore, we are also working on implementing a process for using Image Builder to build a Standard Operating Environment image deploy that to virtual machines. Then we use RHEL System Roles and a lot of custom ansible roles to manage the state of the machines.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) offers enterprise security and really well-written documentation.

The most important security feature in the Red Hat ecosystem is the errata data, combined with Satellite. It tells you exactly which component is vulnerable, which versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are affected, and overall the documentation provided with errata is easily readable for various audiences (for example a summary for management as well as more technical for engineers).

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has helped to mitigate downtime and lower risk by providing kpatch. These are kernel patches, which allow us to apply security patches to a running kernel. We can then plan a full reboot outside of office hours.

The Red Hat Offline Knowledge base offered by Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is really helpful. In a disconnected environment it allows you to search all documentation and errata up to a given date without having to reach out for the internet to check the details.

Sometimes the support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) could be better. Since we're in a disconnected environment, it's sometimes really hard to share explicit details about the issue we're running into and we keep getting asked for an SOS report, which we cannot supply due to security concerns.

I've been working with RHEL for seven years.

Look at the interactive labs provided by Red Hat, they give a great hands-on experience and show off the benefits would advise others looking into using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to investigate the training that is available.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) serves as the operating system for our enterprise infrastructure. We use it to host applications, Kubernetes and OpenShift clusters, and other critical services that we perform day-to-day operations on.

One project I relied heavily on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) was deploying a Red Hat OpenShift cluster. I used RHEL to prepare the bastion host, configure networking, DNS, HAProxy, storage, and install the required packages. After deployment, I also performed troubleshooting and day-to-day operations such as system updates, log analysis, and resolving service issues, as RHEL provided a stable and secure platform throughout the project.

We also use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) as the standard operating system across our servers because of its reliability and enterprise support. It integrates well with tools such as OpenShift, Ansible, and VMware, making it easier to manage and maintain our infrastructure consistently.

The features that stand out the most in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are its stability, security, and long-term support. I also value SELinux for built-in security, DNF or Yum for package management, systemd for service management, and the performance and reliability it provides for enterprise workloads. Another strong point is the seamless integration with Red Hat tools such as OpenShift, Ansible, and Satellite, which makes infrastructure management much easier.

The feature I rely on the most in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is its stability. Since we manage production servers and OpenShift environments, having an operating system that runs reliably with minimal downtime is very important. It allows us to focus on deployments and troubleshooting without worrying about OS-level issues, making day-to-day administration much more efficient.

I would also mention the excellent documentation and large enterprise community around Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). It makes troubleshooting and learning much easier, and because it is widely used in enterprise environments, finding best practices and support resources is straightforward.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has improved the stability and reliability of our infrastructure. Since adopting it as our standard operating system, we have experienced fewer system-related issues, better uptime, and a consistent environment for deploying applications and OpenShift clusters. It has also simplified server administration and troubleshooting, helping the team resolve issues more quickly and maintain a secure, stable platform.

We did not track formal KPIs, but we did notice practical improvements since adopting Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). For example, server provisioning that used to take a few hours became much faster because of standardized RHEL configurations and automation. Troubleshooting time also reduced since the environment was consistent across servers, and we have experienced very few OS-related outages. Overall, it has helped improve operational efficiency and system reliability.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is a very mature platform, but I think it could improve in a few areas. The subscription and licensing model can be a bit complex for new users, and some enterprise features have a steep learning curve. Simplifying subscription management and providing more built-in automation and monitoring tools would make the overall experience even better.

While the documentation is very comprehensive, it can sometimes be overwhelming for beginners. More practical, real-world examples and troubleshooting guides would be helpful. Apart from that, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is a very reliable and well-supported enterprise operating system.

I have been working in this field for the last 1.8 years.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has been very stable in my experience. We use it to run production servers and support OpenShift environments, and it has consistently provided reliable performance with minimal operating system issues. With regular updates and proper maintenance, we have experienced very few unexpected outages, making it a dependable platform for enterprise workflows.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) scales well for enterprise environments. In my experience, it has supported everything from individual servers to larger infrastructure running OpenShift clusters without any issues. It handles increasing workloads reliably, and its integration with enterprise management and automation tools makes it easier to manage systems as the environment grows.

Since I did not interact directly with Red Hat support very often because most issues were handled internally by our team, I can say that whenever we referred to Red Hat's knowledge base and official documentation, they were comprehensive and very helpful for troubleshooting.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has been the standard operating system for our enterprise infrastructure since I joined my organization. I have not worked with a different enterprise Linux distribution in this environment, so there was not a migration or switch during my time there.

We manage our Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) systems using standard Red Hat tools such as DNF or Yum for package management and system updates, along with automation where needed. For provisioning, we follow standardized server configurations to ensure consistency across environments. Overall, I am very satisfied with the management experience because patching is straightforward, the tools are reliable, and maintaining multiple servers is efficient.

I have not used Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Image Builder extensively in production. However, I have used Red Hat system roles along with Ansible to standardize servers, configurations, and automate common administration tasks. They were helpful in maintaining consistency across multiple RHEL servers, reducing manual configuration, and saving time during deployments.

We have seen a return on investment mainly through improved operational efficiency rather than reducing headcount. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) stability and standardized management have reduced the time spent on troubleshooting and routine maintenance. For example, server provisioning and patching are more streamlined, and we have experienced fewer OS-related issues. Overall, it has helped save time, improve uptime, and allow the team to focus on higher-value tasks instead of resolving operating system issues.

From my perspective, the licensing of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is well-suited for enterprise environments because it includes access to updates, security patches, and Red Hat support. The initial subscription cost is higher than community Linux distributions, but the stability, long-term support, and enterprise features provide good value overall. I think the pricing is justified for organizations that require a reliable production-grade operating system.

I have used other enterprise Linux distributions extensively in a production environment, so I cannot make a direct comparison based on hands-on experience. However, from my experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), its enterprise support, long-term stability, SELinux, and integration tools such as OpenShift and Red Hat Insights provide strong business value.

I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a nine out of ten. It is a highly stable, secure, and enterprise-grade operating system with excellent long-term support and seamless integration with tools such as OpenShift and Ansible.

The only reason I would not give Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a ten is that the subscription model can be a bit complex, and the learning curve is steeper for beginners. Overall, it is one of the best enterprise Linux platforms.

From my experience, the AI capabilities around Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are more focused on assisting system administration rather than replacing it. Features such as Red Hat Insights use predictive analytics to identify security risks, configuration issues, and potential vulnerabilities before they become a problem. This helps improve governance by keeping systems compliant and makes security management more proactive while still allowing administrators to review and control any recommended actions.

In my experience, the recommendations from Red Hat Insights are generally accurate and reliable. They help identify configuration issues, security vulnerabilities, and performance recommendations based on Red Hat's knowledge base. We still review the recommendations before applying them in production, but overall, they have been useful for proactive maintenance and reducing potential issues.

I would recommend Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to organizations that need a secure, stable, and enterprise-grade operating system for production workloads. It is especially valuable if you are using technologies such as OpenShift, Ansible, or other Red Hat products because of the strong integration. My advice is to plan your subscription and licensing requirements in advance, follow Red Hat best practices, and make good use of the official documentation and knowledge base to get the most out of the platform. I rate this product nine out of ten overall.