ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Unsolved Fedora Server for production use?

    IT Discussion
    centos rhel fedora linux fedora server rabbitmq
    3
    24
    3.8k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • thwrT
      thwr
      last edited by thwr

      I need to run RabbitMQ and Erlang and planned to deploy CentOS, but EPEL is totally outdated when it comes to RabbitMQ: Packages are 7-9 months behind the official releases. There doesn't seem to be another RPM repository for RabbitMQ. Sure, I could compile everything from source or use the RPM packages provided by rabbitmq.com, but I always try to stick to maintained packages due to updates.

      Luckily, Fedora (RedHat based) has up to date packages, same for Ubuntu (Debian based).

      Top-most requirements:

      • Up to date RabbitMQ packages
      • Reliabilty / stability
      • Small disk and memory footprint

      Question: Is Fedora something you would use for a production system?

      UPDATE: It looks like that Fedora doesn't match my (super) low memory footprint requirement. Sadly, I don't have time to investigate any further here and will fall back to Ubuntu.

      PS: Thanks for tagging the thread, Scott.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • scottalanmillerS
        scottalanmiller
        last edited by

        Yes, definitely. It would not be my first choice for most systems, I'd stick to CentOS, but it is very stable and solid on its own and no reason not to run it when warranted.

        thwrT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • thwrT
          thwr @scottalanmiller
          last edited by

          @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

          Yes, definitely. It would not be my first choice for most systems, I'd stick to CentOS, but it is very stable and solid on its own and no reason not to run it when warranted.

          Great, thanks. Was exactly what I thought: Not my first choice, but still a good one.

          Just thought about another requirement (mono and webserver for ASP.NET), but this should do fine too:
          http://www.inprose.com/sv/articles/10-enable-aspnet-support-in-fedora-linux.html

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • thwrT
            thwr
            last edited by thwr

            Interesting: Fedora 25 starts to panic with RAM < 512MB at the beginning of the kernel init phase, even in text mode. Just had a look at the manual which clearly says that Fedora requires 1GB of RAM.

            Looks like I'm out of luck and have to stick to Ubuntu / Debian.

            scottalanmillerS stacksofplatesS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • scottalanmillerS
              scottalanmiller @thwr
              last edited by

              @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

              Interesting: Fedora 25 starts to panic with RAM < 512MB at the beginning of the kernel init phase, even in text mode. Just had a look at the manual which clearly says that Fedora requires 1GB of RAM.

              Looks like I'm out of luck and have to stick to Ubuntu / Debian.

              That's super weird. I've not tried to compress it that far, but that's ridiculous.

              thwrT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
              • thwrT
                thwr @scottalanmiller
                last edited by

                @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                Interesting: Fedora 25 starts to panic with RAM < 512MB at the beginning of the kernel init phase, even in text mode. Just had a look at the manual which clearly says that Fedora requires 1GB of RAM.

                Looks like I'm out of luck and have to stick to Ubuntu / Debian.

                That's super weird. I've not tried to compress it that far, but that's ridiculous.

                Yeah, seems to be a hard constraint of some sort. They are probably loading tons of hard compiled kernel drivers. Maybe some weird initrd setup, large ramdisks (I don't think so, that's more in the userland area). Who knows 😉

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • thwrT
                  thwr
                  last edited by

                  Just googled for "fedora 256MB" and found this: http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=291559

                  Looks like there are workarounds, but "should work" is not what I'm looking for.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                  • scottalanmillerS
                    scottalanmiller
                    last edited by

                    That's what testing is for 🙂

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • scottalanmillerS
                      scottalanmiller
                      last edited by

                      It's only a memory check, not an actual technical issue. I would go ahead with it.

                      thwrT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • thwrT
                        thwr @scottalanmiller
                        last edited by

                        @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                        It's only a memory check, not an actual technical issue. I would go ahead with it.

                        A check in the kernel phase? It happens right after choosing the kernel command line.

                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • scottalanmillerS
                          scottalanmiller @thwr
                          last edited by

                          @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                          @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                          It's only a memory check, not an actual technical issue. I would go ahead with it.

                          A check in the kernel phase? It happens right after choosing the kernel command line.

                          It has to be in the installer.

                          thwrT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • thwrT
                            thwr @scottalanmiller
                            last edited by thwr

                            @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                            @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                            @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                            It's only a memory check, not an actual technical issue. I would go ahead with it.

                            A check in the kernel phase? It happens right after choosing the kernel command line.

                            It has to be in the installer.

                            That's what I thought. So the kernel panic is likely caused by something else.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • thwrT
                              thwr
                              last edited by

                              Raised the VMs memory to 1GB, did a text mode install, as suggested.

                              But the "blank" system alone is already using 256MB of RAM. There's some kind of management webserver installed and lots of other processes running in the background.

                              0_1486039966080_upload-6d060342-fcce-4787-ab19-1add13330cb1

                              scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • thwrT
                                thwr
                                last edited by

                                This is going to be one of these days...

                                Currently installing Ubuntu 16.04.1 using the ~700MB server ISO. It won't find the installation source mount point when I try to run the machine with just 256MB...

                                Works fine with 512MB.

                                scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • scottalanmillerS
                                  scottalanmiller @thwr
                                  last edited by

                                  @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                                  Raised the VMs memory to 1GB, did a text mode install, as suggested.

                                  But the "blank" system alone is already using 256MB of RAM. There's some kind of management webserver installed and lots of other processes running in the background.

                                  0_1486039966080_upload-6d060342-fcce-4787-ab19-1add13330cb1

                                  Cockpit. You have to "leanify" Fedora.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • scottalanmillerS
                                    scottalanmiller @thwr
                                    last edited by

                                    @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                                    This is going to be one of these days...

                                    Currently installing Ubuntu 16.04.1 using the ~700MB server ISO. It won't find the installation source mount point when I try to run the machine with just 256MB...

                                    Works fine with 512MB.

                                    Why an old version? Current has the best chance of success and for production use, support is critical so that should rule out the older versions that are limited support.

                                    thwrT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • thwrT
                                      thwr @scottalanmiller
                                      last edited by

                                      @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                                      @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                                      This is going to be one of these days...

                                      Currently installing Ubuntu 16.04.1 using the ~700MB server ISO. It won't find the installation source mount point when I try to run the machine with just 256MB...

                                      Works fine with 512MB.

                                      Why an old version? Current has the best chance of success and for production use, support is critical so that should rule out the older versions that are limited support.

                                      Because it's the current stable LTS release.

                                      scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • thwrT
                                        thwr
                                        last edited by

                                        Ubuntu 16.04.1, not yet updated. Looks way better.

                                        0_1486041878303_upload-2a604c7d-a490-4658-a0e9-31fc7cae9b42

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • scottalanmillerS
                                          scottalanmiller @thwr
                                          last edited by

                                          @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                                          @scottalanmiller said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                                          @thwr said in Fedora Server for production use?:

                                          This is going to be one of these days...

                                          Currently installing Ubuntu 16.04.1 using the ~700MB server ISO. It won't find the installation source mount point when I try to run the machine with just 256MB...

                                          Works fine with 512MB.

                                          Why an old version? Current has the best chance of success and for production use, support is critical so that should rule out the older versions that are limited support.

                                          Because it's the current stable LTS release.

                                          That's not a reason. LTS is not the fully supported product from Canonical. There is nothing current about 16.04. 16.10 is the only fully supported Ubuntu product today. If this is for production, you need support. Don't skip support just to get an LTS moniker. LTS is three letters, it is not a support agreement.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                          • thwrT
                                            thwr
                                            last edited by

                                            You're right. Just had the ISO here and didn't thought about the 16.10 release.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 1 / 2
                                            • First post
                                              Last post