We use the solution for application servers. Linux offers many features, including CPU monitoring, memory management, hard disk monitoring, process management, and log management. We rely on command-line tools and shell scripts rather than graphical interfaces for these tasks.

It can be integrated with almost any other product. We use standard methods to make it more compatible with any flavor of Linux.

Patches and upgrades for Oracle Linux are readily accessible. The package management system is streamlined and well-organized. Oracle Linux provides a more integrated approach to package management, consolidating resources and minimizing the need to search for various components separately. This centralized system simplifies the process of maintaining and updating the operating system.

They keep increasing their license prices, making it increasingly costly. So many banks and customers are moving away from Oracle Linux. They are going to other flavors because they are cheaper.

You can add things to it, but Oracle may have added extra stuff that is not supported by other Linux. Then they don't get used to it because we have to work with standard Linux features.

I have been using Oracle Linux for 15 years.

It's very stable. I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

The scalability is good. You can scale up using more processors, memory, and a hard disk. 

You can have 10,000 users on our system.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven or eight out of ten.

The deployment is similar to CentOS and takes an hour to complete.

I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

Oracle Linux is probably the most expensive one.

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

I recommend the solution because it is one of the most stable systems.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution on our server and premises.

Pricing could be improved.

I have been using Oracle Linux for a few years.

The product is 99.99% stable.

The solution is very scalable. Sixty-five users are using it.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

It comes with an annual subscription.

If you were to buy Oracle Data Vault or something similar, it includes a firewall. Securing the DPU with Oracle Data Vault is great, but it costs a fortune.

In data center operations, we use distributors. As far as I know, it's distributed across sixteen sites. Besides Oracle Linux, we have other solutions such as Oracle Forms, Reports, and EDS.

I would advise knowing the number of calls and CPUs required for each application and their allocation.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use it for security purposes. Linux, or Solaris, offers more security and reliability than Windows operating systems. Windows is easier to attack. 

Most files used by hackers are executables, and if your vendor's operating system isn't secure, that's a problem. That's why we use Oracle Linux; it's compatible with our database.

If we use Linux, Solaris, or some other operating systems, we have to build a lot of packages using RPMs (the packet manager). That's a difficult task. With Oracle Linux, we use a single command to update from the Oracle website. 

It updates in minutes and downloads all necessary RPMs required for your database. This allows us to install our Oracle database without errors on Oracle Linux. We can prepare our server within 30 minutes if we have a good internet speed. Oracle platforms are steady and robust.

The main challenge can be compatibility with products from other companies. When you mix products from different vendors, you might experience difficulties. Using products from the same platform simplifies things.

Before Oracle Linux existed, back in 2001 and 2003, Oracle didn't have its own operating system and used other versions of Linux. We faced problems with these. For example, the earlier Linux versions were 32-bit operating systems. This limited the amount of memory we could allocate to our Oracle database instances. Let's say we had a server with 128 GB of RAM; with a 32-bit Linux operating system, we couldn't use all of it for the database.

When later Linux releases became 64-bit, this limitation disappeared, giving us much more memory to work with. The compatibility with Oracle products is a big advantage. It makes it easier for DBAs (Database Administrators) to manage our databases. If my boss tells me two or three new servers are arriving tomorrow, it's not a problem. I can quickly set them up and prepare them – even doing installations on multiple servers at the same time.

Sometimes we have applications that only run on operating systems like Windows, creating difficulties. Microsoft's platform is easier for some people to understand, but troubleshooting issues can be quite challenging, even for experienced programmers. In contrast, troubleshooting on the Oracle platform is much simpler, which is a key benefit.

I have been using it since 2004. 

When we start the installation, we decide the purpose of the server based on the expected database size. If the database is under 100 GB, we will allocate resources accordingly. If the database will be about 100 terabytes or 500 terabytes, then we adjust our allocation. Sometimes, in our UAT (User Acceptance Testing) databases, we allocate less memory, which can cause some minor issues.

Otherwise, in production environments, we take our time. When switching to new hardware, we dedicate at least three months to proper testing. We purchase hardware licenses, software licenses, and database licenses all together. 

We never rush installation because we conduct thorough testing. We test everything from the production database to the standby database. We heavily load the standby database, and if it performs perfectly, then we switch roles – standby becomes production and vice versa. We perform many transactions on both sides to check the load balance.

Once satisfied, let's say we have 20,000 users, each with approximately three active sessions – that's potentially 60,000 sessions. We observe how the server handles this, how much CPU is consumed during peak times. 

Peak times in most organizations are generally from nine to five, with cool down from ten to twelve, then after breaks, again from 02:00 to 04:30 P.M. We monitor CPU consumption and RAM utilization during these peak hours. We check every step, and only when we say, "Okay, this server can support our new hardware and software, we have no issue" – only then do we make the switch.

We are happy. We are using it. We recommend it to our students. We also recommend it to our friends.

Oracle installations are never a problem for us. We've been using Oracle for over 23 years. Even with new features added in later versions, we have no issues because of our extensive experience. 

Oracle provides two options for installation: 

• GUI (graphical user interface) and 
• CLI (command-line interface). 

We use both and have no problems.

We have a separate database server. It's not part of the cloud; it's an Oracle RAC.

Oracle RAC is a combination of multiple servers: two servers, four servers, eight servers, even sixteen servers. It's a combination of multiple servers. Oracle Linux is only just used on the server side, not on the client side.

Primarily, it's the DBAs (Database Administrators) who control and use the database servers. Network and security departments generally use Windows operating systems. They don't deal with Linux commands as much because they have limited access and manage fewer servers – maybe two, three, four, or a maximum of ten. In contrast, we have many database servers, and for security reasons, we prefer Linux. We don't have Windows servers for our database work.

Oracle is expensive compared to the Microsoft platform. with much money. 

We have a license for each and every one, but we have a separate Oracle IT procurement department that deals with the costs.

I'd recommend that you use it. The main challenge for new users of Linux is the command-line interface (CLI). It can be intimidating if you're not familiar with it.

However, Oracle provides excellent manuals and installation guides on its website. If you follow those guidelines, you won't have problems. Oracle Linux is secure and reliable.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. It is a good product. 

We strategically use it in specific cases, leveraging it as a cost-effective substitute for Red Hat due to favorable license agreements with Oracle. In virtualized Oracle database scenarios, it helps meet licensing requirements by pinning workloads to specific cores. For customers with oversized machines, we employ it to ensure compliance, partitioning virtualized clusters to license only necessary components for Oracle databases. Sometimes, it coexists with another management solution, serving solely for core-pinning and compliance, while a separate solution manages virtual machines which optimizes licensing costs and aligns with Oracle's requirements for workload isolation and core-pinning, particularly in scenarios with larger-than-needed virtualized clusters for specific database workloads.

The main business advantage is maintaining compliance with Oracle licensing, avoiding non-compliance issues, and license revisions. Technically, it closely resembles Red Hat Enterprise Linux for bug-for-bug compatibility.

There is a desire to include ZFS as a supported file system from the installation phase. I find it to be an excellent file system that significantly simplifies storage management on systems. Unlike other setups where you need both a file system and a volume manager, ZFS combines these functionalities into a single package. It provides a proven and stable solution, eliminating the need for continuous testing with different technologies. ZFS is enterprise-proven and, compared to other Linux file systems, stands out in terms of management efficiency. While some file systems may offer slightly faster speeds, ZFS excels in overall performance, manageability, and reliability, making it a top choice in the Linux world. Another notable aspect that could be improved is minor compatibility with Red Hat. This is crucial for customers seeking ISV support. ISVs often limit their support to a select few distributions, typically Red Hat, and maintaining compatibility is vital for application functionality.

I have been working with it for more than twenty years.

In terms of availability and stability requirements, it competes well with other major Linux distributions like Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Ubuntu.

It is scalable, catering to a diverse range of systems—from relatively small setups to significantly large ones. When dealing with substantial workloads, especially on the x86 platform, I often find that Oracle Linux outperforms other solutions, showcasing its efficiency and capability to handle larger workloads more effectively.

In most cases, users have found the support to be reliable. I appreciate their support page and the effective manner in which they handle technical support calls—it's generally quite satisfactory. Often, the questions I encounter are more suited for second-line support rather than the initial, first-line support. I would appreciate a quicker transition to second-line support for more efficient resolution. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

For mission-critical operations, Solaris is my preferred operating system, particularly for tasks like running Oracle databases. Solaris is chosen for its exceptional stability, ensuring uninterrupted 24/7, 52-week operations. The development philosophy of Solaris prioritizes stability and capabilities. In contrast, Linux prioritizes introducing new features, often at the expense of compatibility.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The duration is influenced by factors such as the deployment purpose, the platform chosen (virtual machine or hardware), and the specific tasks associated with the deployment. Simple deployments, such as setting up a basic web service, can take as little as ten minutes or even less. However, for more complex configurations like a rack cluster, the deployment time extends, potentially requiring a day or two due to the numerous configurations involved. Typically, installations don't involve utilizing an architect; instead, a single person can handle most of the architect's solution installations. The maintenance process is considered fairly straightforward and well-supported.

The cost is relatively affordable. The license itself is free, similar to Red Hat. There is no direct cost for running it. However, the expenses are associated with the license, which includes support. Typically, we opt for a seven-year database license, and for most of our customers, we tend to commit to periods of three to five years at a time.

If you're seeking a stable and reliable enterprise distribution, it is an excellent choice. It stands out with its stability and a team of skilled engineers within the company. It's a strong distribution worth considering for a dependable and efficient workhorse in an enterprise environment. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

We use the product for Oracle Database and MySQL databases.

We do not use any features specific to the OS. We are more interested in the packages needed as prerequisites for Oracle databases. The performance, feasibility, and flexibility of the I/O subsystem are valuable to us. The compatibility of Kernel with Oracle is much better than other tools.

NTP communication should be more concrete and robust. Time drifts happen frequently, and the database restarts automatically to protect data integrity. The product should give a warning before the time drift happens. It should alert us about how long the time drift will take. Such features will make the product a very good OS.

I have been using the solution for around ten years.

I rate the product’s stability an eight out of ten. The operating system has some issues with the network time protocol.

The scalability is very nice. We can scale horizontally by adding more servers. We can also scale a single server vertically. It depends on the physical hardware that is available. On average, we have 1500 users.

We got a few opportunities to interact with the support team when we had vulnerabilities in Kernel. We contacted the team for feedback on which version to use to fix the vulnerability. We have created four or five tickets. All the tickets were supported very well.

Once, we created a database ticket that required a spin-off ticket to the operating system team. We could easily create the ticket and get both teams to work together. That is the advantage of having both Oracle Enterprise Linux and Oracle Database.

The initial setup is straightforward. Once the first installation is done, we can clone and replicate it for other installations. The solution is deployed on our own private cloud.

We have nine DBAs and two engineers to deploy the solution.

We are not paying anything for the operating system.

We are using synchronous I/O and ASM storage. We are not using any other features. Before bringing in improvements, we want to evaluate RHEL and OEL for better integration of the platforms and the virtual machines we are deploying. We are checking the compatibility of RHEL and OEL with our existing infrastructure.

We want the product to support the database, have more compatibility, and give fewer issues during peak workloads. These are the things we are looking for. We are mainly concerned about library support, security patching, and technical support from the vendor.

I am an end user. I am not aware of the deployment process. The operating system will be deployed as per our specifications, and it will be given to us. We perform the database installation on it.

We do not have much interaction with the development team. We only interact with the team when it needs to create a new database or a user inside it. I recommend the solution to others. Most of the Oracle tools were developed on Oracle Enterprise Linux. Compatibility and support-wise, everything will be under a single umbrella. We do not have to find another vendor. We have an unlimited license for Database. I do not know the terms.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

In our company, we are using Oracle Linux for virtualized machines or VMs. So, Oracle Linux is the operating software for us. The tool is easy to use, and its performance is also good. From a competitive point of view, the solution is cost-effective, so it is installed in our machines.

The solution's security could be better and improved, but I am not sure.

Since it is a VM, it gets slow. It can be an area for improvement. So, we get a connection, making it not a very significant issue since it usually works well.

I have been using Oracle Linux for two to three years as an end-user. Also, I don't remember the version of the solution I am using.

It is a stable solution. We rarely face any issues with the machine.

Since the solution is a per-machine license-based one, I am unsure about its scalability.

I have worked with thousands who were working on the solution.

With our machines, we do seek help from the solution's technical support. So, whenever we have an issue, as I mentioned, we go back to IT support to raise a ticket, and they resolve our issues in a day.

We switched to Oracle Linux from another solution since it is our organization that provides us with software, it is. So they decided Oracle Linux to be the operating system we all use.

We get the machines to work on, but since I am an end-user, I feel that I am not the right person to speak on how Oracle Linux does the setup and the cost involved in the solution. We let the staff involved in the deployment and maintenance know whenever we have an issue with the operating system. We generate a ticket, and depending upon an issue, they take a day maximum to resolve our issues.

Our IT support team did everything related to the installation part.

We are currently operating the solution using a license-based version. We get licenses per machine.

The evaluation of other solutions was not carried out at an organizational level but at a personal level, and I looked at Microsoft-based products. There are two different scenarios, one of which, at a personal level, I might have a different operating system on my computer, while in the second one, my office might be providing me with some different machine. But we need to acknowledge the fact that the company's decision is of paramount importance.

I rate the overall product a seven to eight out of ten.

We use Oracle Linux for Virtualization Platform, DNS Servers, Database Servers and IT infrastructure observability tools

Orlacle Linux has provided a redhat compatible open source OS for diverse needs. We smoothly run on Oracle OS; KVM virtualization environment, Postgesql databases, Zabbix, Grafana, Fluentd and other observability tools. We have seen a remarkable improvement as DNS queries are fast and the platforms can be easily secured with no worries of security issues arising due to unpatched systems.

There is full compatibility with RedHat-based operating systems, in particular Centos, which we widely deployed before Oracle Linux (OL).

For usability, the GUI options during the initial setup could be included with advanced OS tuning and optimization, currently as with most Linux systems that can be done via  CLI.

We have been using Oracle Linux for more than three years

Very stable

Very scalable, especially with available support options

Haven't used the customer service and support

Positive

Centos, migrated after Centos switches to Centos Stream

Straightforward setup, used the free option

Implemented in-house

100%

It's an open source OS freerly available. Support subscription is paid

Yes, Rocky Linux, Alma Linux and OpenSuse

A pretty stable and secure operating system that perfectly serve as an alternative to Centos OS.