I do agree to this too, but I really wish that people would learn their lesson, and the “chosen” distro wasn’t a RHEL clone!
Red Hat is not to be trusted, how many more issues do they have to throw at the people for the people to realize this?
Rocky and also Alma really do not relly have the resources to have their own EL development, it’s still downstream somehow from RH.
Oracle does have enough resources for this, but I would NOT use Oracle underneath, no matter what!
Oracle has blown away too much trust in the OpenSource community!
OpenOffice / MySQL / now JAVA…
At least Debian is supported for the basis, so I’ll just use Debian for my and my clients nodes…
(and innerly laugh at gullible people…)
And for production environments should be a golden rule…
Neverthless, a lot of software/packages come for several distros, NS8 decided to be distro-agnostic (with some limits due to availability of packages on every flavour).
With a working cluster (made from more than 3 servers) with the same underlying OS, for instance I’m willing to try a different distro (different support for storage or filesystem, another branch of kernel development, point release instead of rolling); NS8 should be there to allevate me the container hassle.
Install OS and core, adopt node, backup of a container from one node, restore to another. It’s still podman or docker, the same orchestrator behind… should work without quirks or adaptation.
Otherwise, distro-agnostic start to become quite pointless and only a way to broaden the installation base.
The question is for future answer. But the answer should be put into system requirements, top of documentation for careful deploy the cluster environment.
I think it should be a good practice. As sysadmin, I don’t particularly appreciate learning and managing too many different linux distributions. In my experience, sysadmins prefer to standardise the basic distro in order to manage more effectively updates/customization and don’t get mad
As a not-green-anymore person, willing to reduce effort and (supposed) time wasting knowing newer things? I tend to agree, for several reasons. However, it’s not the point.
If uniform underlying OS will be mandatory for clusters, IMVHO will complicate a lot the growth of installation base.
I’m expecting a migration path (dream zone… live migration? ) from one node with one distro to another node with another distro (and @davidep stated that should be possible) can relief a lot of hassle for sysadmins migrating from community supported distro to a service level supported distro.