Would Arch Be good for a server?

nighthawk · 2010-09-03 03:54:29

Hey guys,

so i've been looking around the net to see if arch linux would be good for a web server, but everywhere seems to have mixed answers,

some say it updates to fast, some say its good cause of that, its hard to know which to believe and which not to

if you guys could help that'd be great

jmad980 · 2010-09-03 04:03:53

It's about half and half IMO, it's nice having a fast update path for w/e things you're running on it, but older (I.E. Debian stable and such) is more predictable, depends what you're doing, arch can turn into almost anything ArchServer is worth a look see

sand_man · 2010-09-03 04:30:56

You will get different opinions on this. Most people here are biased towards Arch and say that it is fine to use as a server as long as you know what you are doing.
I used to run Arch on my server but have since changed to FreeBSD and never looked back. Nothing beats Arch for a desktop though

Inxsible · 2010-09-03 04:38:17

This topic has been beaten down like a dead donkey. Search the forums, you will find a bunch of threads on it.

However, I cannot guarantee whether you will find a definitive answer though.

mikesd · 2010-09-03 06:11:14

Current favorite answer to this needlessly repeated question --> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 59#p673859

Search the forums and also check out --> http://www.archserver.org/

marfig · 2010-09-03 11:47:09

mikesd wrote:

Current favorite answer to this needlessly repeated question --> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 59#p673859

But then, the question rarely is made in that sense. Instead OPs usually are just curious and not engaged in setting up a server (where that answer definitely is gold).

This issue should perhaps deserve a wiki... hmm.

Last edited by marfig (2010-09-03 11:48:12)

sand_man · 2010-09-03 12:08:29

If you have used Arch before then you could easily answer your own question. Sometimes new updates mean you need to change a config file or something of the sort. If you don't pay attention to what's being updated then your web server may become unusable until you fix it. The benefits of using a bleeding edge distro come with responsibilities. If you were to use Arch as a critical production server then I suggest running a mirrored test server to do the updates on prior to production.
I don't think there is anything more to say about that.

zenlord · 2010-09-03 12:20:21

sand_man wrote:

If you were to use Arch as a critical production server then I suggest running a mirrored test server to do the updates on prior to production.

My thoughts exactly.

kittykatt · 2010-09-03 14:17:34

I use Arch for my server and I love it. Just thought I'd throw in my two cents.

.:B:. · 2010-09-03 14:18:19

I find with a few stability choices - like going with the LTS kernel instead of the regular one - gets you a long way. I switched my home server and AppleTV to the LTS kernel. If you keep up with the news (on the frontpage) you should be prepared for any pesky upgrades that might cause trouble, but Arch e.g. has no security policy whatsoever so you have to weigh the pros and cons.

timm · 2010-09-08 21:27:01

I use Arch as a production server, and have a test machine at home to play with major updates. Have had a couple gotcha situations, but nothing that hasn't been solvable with the help of the wiki and forums.

Sand_man, I've looked at playing with FreeBSD, how was the learning curve after Arch?

655321 · 2010-09-09 00:26:08

I asked the same question a while ago cause I wanted to change our Company ubuntu server to arch. And now after a while using both distros (arch for desktop, ubuntu for server). I would say that it depends on what you are doing with the server. If your server would host a critical service for your company (say a file server with critical files, DHCP, DNS, stuff like that), I would say NO cause a package upgrade/break can bring the whole system down, and in this cases you dont want fast updates, you want STABILITY.

But, if you were to deploy an arch server at home with no critical services, say a web server to do some tests, do some system monitoring or stuff like that, then arch would be a viable distro (and a very good one).

So in short, In my opinion, for the very fast update nature of Arch, it isnt suitable for server use because one bug can compromise the entire system.

just my 2 cents

sand_man · 2010-09-09 00:58:45

timm wrote:

Sand_man, I've looked at playing with FreeBSD, how was the learning curve after Arch?

Minimal I think. If you are proficient using Arch (particularly the command line), you will have no problem setting up FreeBSD. Some annoying things that will get you at first are things like vi's out-of-the-box settings and the default shell's settings. Once you tune up the CLI, you are good to go.

I could go on forever about all the differences but you are best to just try it yourself.

Wintervenom · 2010-09-09 04:01:39

Wintervenom from IRC wrote:

You only need to be careful about using Arch for a server if that server is your income.

ga01f4733 · 2010-09-09 06:11:42

I use arch as SMB file server, and a box as webserver hosting my site. I dont know much about linux, but I'm quite happy. Still had not an issue, yet, upgrading those systems. Although I'm using very basic setups. I guess it gets darker the deeper you go ...,

just my expirience,

chris-kun · 2010-09-09 06:37:40

I've also had arch on my server for years without any big hiccups. Don't see me moving away anytime soon.

LeeF · 2010-09-10 01:12:11

I've had an Arch server running for 3 years now, and that server is my income, it manages all my code repositories and all my VPN connections to all my client's servers that I manage (All my clients use CentOS) and I have only had one issue that was pacman related(did -Syyn then -S foobar, should have done -Syu instead of -Syyn). Unfortunately the server did completely die two weeks ago, and took a substantial amount of non critical, non backed up data with it, this was from using ext4 as the file system.

Also, I've never had an issue with Arch overwriting my config files, they always get the .pacnew extension. Although, having said that, there have been times when config files are no longer usable after an update because the program no longer accepts certain options used or has had it's config syntax modified. This is an issue that is non-specific to Arch, it has happened on CentOS servers as well.

There is no best answer for this question in my opinion, it depends on the sysadmin and their proficiency using Linux. However as others have said, using a mirrored server for a sandbox is best, I do this for my one remote Arch Linux server that manages my public facing services, and I do this using a virtual machine in Xen. Also, I do not recommend ext4 for production.

viking60 · 2010-09-30 12:55:27

Does anyone know what has happened to http://archserver.org ? It seems to be down -the repos too
It has been gone for a while now.

Allan · 2010-09-30 13:01:00

It was there within the last 12 hours. And they released an RC of their install iso so I think it should be back soon.

viking60 · 2010-09-30 13:31:04

Not very reassuring for a server site, that the server is down I think

Last edited by viking60 (2010-09-30 13:31:22)

codycarey · 2010-09-30 17:57:16

The guys over at Slicehost offer Arch as an option on their VPS's. I've been using them for a couple years now and they provide some rock solid OS's. They are really open about what they do and their chat is always manned by a system admin or two. #slicehost on irc.freenode.net.

viking60 · 2010-09-30 19:43:48

Do they offer Archserver repos? They have been down for over 12 hours now.

.:B:. · 2010-09-30 19:51:13

If you need Arch Server repos, just install the regular Arch flavour and add the repos. Don't expect VPS providers to support or offer every single niche distro out there.

Allan · 2010-10-01 01:32:33

.:B:. wrote:

If you need Arch Server repos, just install the regular Arch flavour and add the repos

That will probably not work... They have a completely separate base to Arch Linux. It would be like installing Ubuntu and the changing the repos to point at Debian server and hoping everything changes to being Debian.

fukawi2 · 2010-10-01 06:06:47

viking60 wrote:

Does anyone know what has happened to http://archserver.org ? It seems to be down -the repos too
It has been gone for a while now.

Admin error!! (Me and my security!)

viking60 wrote:

They have been down for over 12 hours now.

Took me a while to get on to the console of the server (it's in Amsterdam, I'm in Australia) because the damn Dell DRAC card won't work on anything except XP and IE6

Arch Linux

#1 2010-09-03 03:54:29

Would Arch Be good for a server?

#2 2010-09-03 04:03:53

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#3 2010-09-03 04:30:56

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#4 2010-09-03 04:38:17

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#5 2010-09-03 06:11:14

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#6 2010-09-03 11:47:09

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#7 2010-09-03 12:08:29

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#8 2010-09-03 12:20:21

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#9 2010-09-03 14:17:34

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#10 2010-09-03 14:18:19

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#11 2010-09-08 21:27:01

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#12 2010-09-09 00:26:08

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#13 2010-09-09 00:58:45

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#14 2010-09-09 04:01:39

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#15 2010-09-09 06:11:42

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#16 2010-09-09 06:37:40

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#17 2010-09-10 01:12:11

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#18 2010-09-30 12:55:27

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#19 2010-09-30 13:01:00

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#20 2010-09-30 13:31:04

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#21 2010-09-30 17:57:16

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#22 2010-09-30 19:43:48

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#23 2010-09-30 19:51:13

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#24 2010-10-01 01:32:33

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

#25 2010-10-01 06:06:47

Re: Would Arch Be good for a server?

Board footer