|
Home > Archive > Linux/Unix > March 2001 > The RHCE Exam
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| DavidH4JC 2001-03-15, 10:38 pm |
| Hi All,
I have been browsing these forums every so often and I have posted a couple times on the CCNA forum. I just passed the RHCE Exam a couple weeks ago and I thought I would share a few thoughts about the exam. No braindumps, just some general info. First of all, I took the exam on December 1 and I averaged 76%, you need to get 80%. There are three sections to the exam, to of them are performance based where you work on an actual computer and the other is a computer based multiple choice exam. The performance based exams are the Debug Exam and the Server Installation. The debug exam consists of four problems and on the first exam I only got 50% on this section, I had to end up skipping two sections. I got 82% on the multiple choice exam, the questions weren't too hard, they give you an hour which is plenty of time. The last part is the Server Install and you have 2.5 hours to do it. The server exam isn't too hard, it covers most of the common services and tasks that you would perform on a Linux server. I got 96% on that.
So, the first time around the debug exam really messed me up, it is pretty stressful when you get stuck on a problem and your machines won't boot. After I found out my score a couple days later, I went to my test Linux box and I was able to duplicate both of the problems I had and I also tried dorking up most of the stuff I could think of. My advice for the debug exam is to get very familiar with the boot process, it will help you single out where the problem is coming from. Also know how to work in rescue and single user mode, that knowledge will come in handy. The second time around I passed the debug exam with 100% and you know right then whether you passed a section or not because the test administrator will come and make sure you fixed the machines properly.
I got 90% on the multiple choice the second time around, I used the new RHCE book from Sybex, it was pretty good and it was probably most helpful for the written exam because it has a test engine. The multiple choice is basically informational questions about how to perform basic tasks, if you are familiar with most of the common functions and commands, you should do fine. You find out your multiple choice score after the last exam, but I felt pretty good about it after finishing it up. After that we had lunch which is provided with the exam fee. They have a good catered lunch with a variety of breads and meats for your sandwich creation pleasure.  By the way, they have free drinks all day so you can keep up that caffeine flowing through your veins.
After lunch we had the server install, they give you plenty of time if you know what you are doing and fortunately I have done a lot of installs in the year I have been using Linux and I have messed with configuring most of the common services such as Apache, Samba, BIND, ipchains, FTP, OpenSSH, Squid, etc. I would recommend at least messing with most of the common network services and have a basic knowledge of how to configure them. Fortunately for me, the requirements were the same from the early exam so I paid close attention to the details and this time I got 100%. It is a pretty tough test, but if you have a good bit of experience, it is kind of enjoyable to work on an actual computer for the exam. The test isn't cheap, $749 is the actual price, but fortunately my employer is really supportive of Red Hat Linux and my test was paid for by them. The RHCE is a great goal to shoot for I wish anyone who is studying for it all the best, study hard!
DavidH4JC | |
|
| Congrats David. I can see why the troubleshooting section would be difficult. Since Linux is so reliabile, you wouldn't have as much experience with that as the setup. | |
|
| I just passed my RHCE. My employer has apparently flipped his lid and has paid for me to take the exam. I also found the troubleshooting the hardest part, as I usually haven't ran into a whole lot of trouble on my Linux boxen. It took me a while to learn the config stuff at first, but once they were up and running, I rarely have problems with them. The test was hard, but doable. Felt about 10 feet tall after finishing it . . . but I STILL prefer Slackware! | |
|
| Yeah, Slackware's my favorite Linux distro too. Well, it's tied with Mandrake anyway, they both have their places. How about a SCCALN (Slackware Certified Caffeine Addict/Linux Nut) cert? I'd go for that one | |
|
| Congratulations Randy! I know what you mean about passing it, it really is a great feeling! What was your score? Having to actually work with a computer for the exam makes it worth more to me than the other written exams I have taken, I think Red Hat does a pretty good job of making it a valuable certification. That's true about not having many problems with Linux boxes, once get it installed it just runs like a charm if you have everything configured right. I have installed quite a few firewalls so that helped me get familiar with the installation. I e-mailed Red Hat a few days after I passed and they said there are about 2700 RHCEs, its pretty cool to be one of the few with that certification. I have messed some with Mandrake 7.0 several months ago, I liked the graphical install and the GUI tools included with Mandrake, but we use Red Hat at work and I have come to enjoy doing most of my configuration from the console. I think I would prefer Mandrake as a desktop OS, but I think Red Hat is pretty good as a server OS. Looks like you have several certs you want to pursue from here Randy, what's next? | |
|
| Hi David and Randy,
congrats on earning this certification! AFAIK is it one of the toughest in IT 
regards
Cat | |
|
| Well, I got to know my Red Hat pretty well in the last few months, and I whizzed through most of it, but I just scraped by on the troubleshooting part. Red Hat is aimed specifically at the server market, and I agree that Mandrake seems a better OS for the desktop. As far as configuration is concerned, I typically get most stuff done at the command line, believe it or not I usually find it faster. At any rate, setting up the X server is usually the last thing I do on a system when initially installing. The virtual consoles make troubleshooting the installs a bit easier and when dealing with a server, a GUI more often than not just uses up resources better spent on providing other services. (Fortunately for me, I started my computer training with DOS when the GUI was just another program that you had to start and have never really feared the command line, lots of techs nowadays take a while before getting to that stage).
Yes, I was looking at some Cisco certs some time ago before getting bitten by the *nix bug, and so I interrupted my Cisco stuff to learn Unix properly. Although, I think I've a long, long way to go before gaining "guru" status, I'll try getting the CCDA next I think and then see what happens. | |
|
| Yep, I also run my HP-UX Server without X. Even with NT I do lots of my admin task from commandline. It has much better performance.
regards
Cat | |
|
| My NT Workstation crashes so much that I've never had much interest in learning a whole lot about it. The more I use it, the more annoyed I get. Am hoping for better things in Win2K, I heard it was a lot more stable. | |
|
| Congrats on the pass Randy. Mandrake is well suited for the desktop and Slackware as more of a server OS. Red Hat is somewhere in between.
If I'm going to do any serious configuration the first thing I do is fire up KDE. I consider myself a novice user, so it's nice to have a few how tos and man pages open while figuring out how to do something. For things that I've already done a couple times, it's a lot faster to use the command prompt though, so I can see your point.
"CCDA Exam Certification Guide" is a great book for the DCN exam. Just make sure you know that book inside and out before taking the exam. I'm going to take the BCMSN sometime in early April, then it's on to the fun stuff (BSCN).
Windows 2000 is a lot more stable then NT. I think this has a lot to do with hardware compatibility. | |
|
| Randy, W2k is much more stable than NT. But lots of my customers use NT (specially as mail server (Exchange)) as well as HP-UX and Caldera. So I have to learn NT. But for missioncritical apps Like databases I prefer UNIX
regards
Cat | |
|
| Thanks for the tip, I'll try to get the book the next time I get paid. I assume most businesses will be upgrading to Win2K soon, and I reckon it's a good thing . . . I dislike Microsoft's strategy of "forcing" upgrades on companies but rebooting half a dozen times a day can be maddening when you're trying to get some work done.
Oddly enough, although Slackware would make an excellent server, I have always thought of it as more of a hacker's toy . . . a powerhouse to keep on the box at home, but I know of relatively few businesses that use it, although it has long been my favourite, with Debian and SuSE coming in as close seconds.
I see your point about that KDE manuals . . . KDE typically comes with extensive documentation which makes shooting any trouble a lot easier, but if I am going to configure a server, I usually leave the GUI off so that it won't eat up resources, and I find that setting up Internet connexions and getting all of the configuration done first is easier for me. Besides, I think it is usually good to have a "method" and sort of stick to it so that you can more easily locate trouble spots -- kind of like having a mental checklist. Also sometimes depending on KDE-dependent applications can be a handicap and can often keep you from the guts of your system which I don't like. Sometimes the video cards have problems supporting KDE or GNOME in some cases, and it often requires a bit of hacking to get them up right on some computers. For these reasons, I leave it till last, though I see your point.
For mission critical apps, I would always go with Unix, until I see real proof that Win2K is as good, and that's one devil of a task. I do my programming on an NT 4.0 WS at work so I have to be somewhat familiar with them, but I get kind of exasperated with all of the interruptions. Mind you, the machine itself is getting on a bit.
I've never used HP-UX or AIX and have marginal experience with Solaris, but am very familiar with Caldera. They don't seem to have the marketing power that Red Hat has, but I think they have a quality product. I've used it for a while and have never had probs with it. I think it's good that they're in the mix as we don't want RH to become the M$ of the Linux world . . . the more competition we havem the better it will be for all in the long run. Caldera seems to be focusing on businesses and integrating regular Linux servers with SCO Unix which should make a powerful working environment. I wonder why they seem to draw so little attention . . . | |
|
| though RH is market leader, the position in europe isn't as high as in the states. AFAIK is in Germany SuSE is market leader, followed by Caldera. And I hope they will become it in whole Europe
regards
Cat | |
|
| Yeah, I know SuSE was big in Germany, and since the distro is so high-quality, I knew that it had begun to spread (I myself love it) and I know TurboLinux (which I know absolutely nothing about) is popular around Japan, but I wasn't aware that Caldera was popular in Europe. Cooperation is good, but the competition is good also; we don't really want it so that one company is known as the "Linux Company" although I certainly have no problem with RH. I can't help but think that more of this trend will be a good thing. It might seem to fracture the market up some, but competing business and home distros can only increase the quality of the product IMHO. |
|
|
|
|