Arch Linux

jackpot

Member

From: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Registered: 2014-08-18

Posts: 86

[Solved] Opinions for web-server usage

This may qualify for being TGNed or Binned and sent to fires of hell but admins/mods please bear with my question.

I need to create web-server to host my website (I know paid hosting is an option but want to learn). Which of following should I go for?

1. Arch Linux with LTS kernel,
2. CentOS 7,
3. Debian, or
4. Ubuntu.

a. Security remains primary.
b. No bloat comes in second, I will install only packages needed.

IMHO #2 is the answer but Internet search made me explore #3 and #4.

Thanks.

Last edited by jackpot (2017-01-20 11:41:28)

---

KDE is all good bloated, try to trim away from K*.apps... whatever it leaves behind equals "Kuck yourself!"
nVidia.... fsck sdy0

boban_dj

Member

Registered: 2015-03-17

Posts: 150

Re: [Solved] Opinions for web-server usage

Hi,
If you want to learn and understand, I would recommend Arch as webserver.
For security you have simular options for Centos and Arch (basic good configuration of iptables firewall, httpd.conf, php.ini etc. will keep script kiddies out. But it really depends what you want and what you host)
In Centos you have more "plug and play" solutions, I mean complete software packages, which for me is a bit bloated if you need a simple but stable setup.
Pacman is for me more flexible then yum for Centos, but its my opinion.
Arch seems lightweight compared too Centos server possibilities, but really it depends on how you build it. For me Arch is much more managable, customizable and buildable then Centos, building it from scratch and add packages on to your server along the way, as your knowledge grows.
Here you can read some basic setup with Arch as server: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Server

In general most of possibilities that you have for Centos are available for Arch, or you can build them yourself.
For example: there are many ready made solutions for apache virtual host setup for Centos or Ubuntu. But you can as easily make a bash script for Arch as well.
Just to illustrate how I see things compared to Centos.

ewaller

Administrator

From: Pasadena, CA

Registered: 2009-07-13

Posts: 19,804

Re: [Solved] Opinions for web-server usage

There are a few questions you should consider. 
Can you tolerate down time?  How much?
How much traffic do you expect?
What technologies are you going to use?  Apache?  Database? PHP/Python?  Django? Ruby or Rails?   Or just plain old static HTML?
Do you need to be scalable?  Do you need automatic fail over?
What are your ISP's policies?  How much bandwidth will you need.

The only reason not to use Arch is downtime for maintenance.   
If you are talking about a hobby site that will see a few hits an hour running on a consumer grade Internet connection it does not really matter.   Be more concerned about your security than availability.

---

Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Trilby

Inspector Parrot

Registered: 2011-11-29

Posts: 29,561

Website

Re: [Solved] Opinions for web-server usage

The only reason not to use Arch is downtime for maintenance.

I agree - however, if you keep on top of things, there is no reason an arch server need have anymore downtime than any other.

Periodic updates that you are prepared for may mean a brief bit of downtime every once in a while.  With non rolling distros you can acheive absolutely no downtime for years ... but then the whole thing crumbles to the floor as you have no choice but to migrate to a new release of that distro which basically requires a complete reinstall.  That or you tolerate insecure decade-old bit-rotting software.

A well managed arch system could reboot to apply any needed updates in seconds.  Even if someone happened to be on the site during that period, they *might* experience a breif laps of service if they happen to refresh their page or query the server at the exact moment of the reboot.  Odds are they'd scratch their head for a moment, then refresh their browser - and there's a good chance that by then the server would be back up.

---

"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

cris9288

Member

Registered: 2013-01-07

Posts: 348

Re: [Solved] Opinions for web-server usage

If your reason for learning is to make yourself more attractive to employers, then 2,3 and 4 are probably better options as you'll find more instances of them in the wild. You'll get familiar with iptables, selinux, pre-systemd service management, etc. But it depends on what you are trying to do. In the "enterprise" it is my understanding that Centos 6 and Debian are more common. You might even see some CentOs 7. More modern upstart, cloud environments (a lot generalization going on here...) might make more use of Ubuntu.

That said, I've been running several web applications on Arch for a while now and I have just recently been starting to move them over to CentOS, just to gain the experience. Most of the differences you'll come across are pretty simple - how do you manage services? How do you manage the network? How do you install packages, add repos, etc. In Arch, an application had its configuration under some directory, but in CentOS it's under a different directory. Still the basic concepts are the same and a lot of what you learn in Arch can be applied to other distros.

c0mm0ner

Member

Registered: 2015-11-09

Posts: 93

Re: [Solved] Opinions for web-server usage

Whatever distribution you choose: If you do have to avoid downtimes you will need a concept for testing and staging. Debian or Centos updates can fail too. Therefore it's mainly a question of time effort. How often do you want to go trough this procedure? On the other Hand, running secure systems do need updates on a regular basis.