Re: RH now exiting 1 more data center

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Res wrote:

reliability + stability = RH of old.
fedora reminds me of NT, for desktops its fine, but forget any REAL server
use.

But there are at least several posters to this list that have been using it successfully for real server use...


I'm personally running three Fedora servers for all of our nameservice and authentication (DNS, LDAP, SAMBA, NTP) and they've been up for over a month and a half (since the last kernel update I felt compelled to install). I did have some issues with OpenLDAP, but those have been mostly resolved by updating my RH8 and RH7.3 clients, who were keeping way to many connections open and overloading select()'s capability to handle them.

I also have a Fedora server that I've configured with postfix, cyrus IMAP, clamav and spamassassin that I've been testing and plan to switch to in the near future (I need to schedule downtime to migrate all the user data). It has only been under light test loads, but has never hung or crashed. Neither have any of my 32 compute nodes, who have been under more heavy usage.

we had 7.3 boxes running untill recent that NEVER missed a beat, never
had to touch them,, like the RH9 boxes we have.... since fedora went on
the 7.3 boxes, well, what a nightmare, daily interventions.
I know of others who were running 7.3 samba servers, fedora destroyed it,
they gave up and reinstalled 7.3 and backups from tape, they have told me
they will not touch it again either. I know RH engineers work on this
project, but the QC crew sure as hell dont, if they did FC1 WOULD be as
relaible and stable as previous RH's.

If you'd like to be constructive, could you register your problems in bugzilla or provide more information here? That way we can hopefully figure out what it is that's specific to your installation that isn't working, whether it can easily be fixed, and what we need to do to make sure it doesn't happen to other people.


I'm not saying Fedora is perfect... in fact I have to go register some bugs against xscreensaver in a few minutes, but I don't believe that your experience is that common, or neccessarily all due to Fedora.

Did you perform 'upgrade' or 'clean' installs? The former often appears to be a troublemaker for people...




[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux