4 ms·

> Yes, while I use Fedora on my laptop, I also know Fedora is generally not a good option for a server. Why is Fedora not considered good for a server?

neelc 8mo ago
It's a cutting-edge distro with 6-month release and 13-month support cycles. Whereas Debian/Ubuntu have 5 years and RHEL/Alma/Rocky have 10 years.
- zuntaruk 8mo ago
  I don't feel like this really answers the question thought, right? At least not at face value. I could see the side of maintenance burden being a potential point, meaning that one would be "pushed" to update the system between releases more often than something else.
  - g947o 8mo ago
    I take it as no more than someone's personal opinion, since there is no reference provided whatsoever.
  - p_ing 8mo ago
    Typically you want stability and predictability in a server. A platform that has a long support lifecycle is often more attractive than one with a short lifecycle. If you can stay on v12.x for 10 years versus having to upgrade yearly yo maintain support, that’s ideal. 12.x should always behave the same way with your app where-as every major version upgrade may have breaking changes. Servers don’t need to change, typically. They’re not chasing those quick updates that we expect on desktops.
    - zuntaruk 8mo ago
      Yeah, and that's the take I assumed to hear based on what was said. However, for something like ARM and the use case this particular device may have, in reality you would _want_ (my opinion) to be on a more rolling release distros to pick up the updates that make your system perform better. I'd take a similar stance for devices that are built in a homelab for running LLMs.
      - p_ing 8mo ago
        Depends on what you're building an ARM system for. There are proper ARM servers out there; server work isn't the exclusive domain of x86, after all. For homelabs, that's out the window. Do whatever you want/fits your needs best. This isn't the place where you'd likely find highly available networks, clustered or highly available services, UPS with battery banks, et. al.
zuntaruk 8mo ago
I'd also love to hear what folks have to say about this. For myself I've had nothing but positive experiences running Fedora on my servers.
- avhception 8mo ago
  I think it's highly circumstantial. For example, my personal servers run a lot of FreeBSD and even though I could stay on major releases for a rather long time, I usually upgrade almost as soon as new releases are available. For servers at work, I tried running Fedora. The idea was that it would be easier to have small, frequent updates rather than large, infrequent updates. Didn't work. App developers never had enough time to port their stuff to new releases of underpinning software, so we frequently had servers with unsupported OS version. Gave up and switched to RockyLinux. We're in the process of upgrading the Rocky8-based stuff to Rocky9. Rocky9 was released 2022.
INTPenis 8mo ago
It's more maintenance due to its frequent release cycles, but it's perfectly good as a server OS. I've used it many times, friends use it. You can't mess up the release cycle because their package repos drop old releases very quickly, so you're left stranded. A friend recently converted his Fedora servers to RHEL10 because he has kids now and just doesn't have the time for the release cycle. So RHEL, or Debian, Alma, Rocky, offer a lot more stability and less maintenance requirement for people who have a life.

neelc 8mo ago

It's a cutting-edge distro with 6-month release and 13-month support cycles. Whereas Debian/Ubuntu have 5 years and RHEL/Alma/Rocky have 10 years.

zuntaruk 8mo ago
I don't feel like this really answers the question thought, right? At least not at face value. I could see the side of maintenance burden being a potential point, meaning that one would be "pushed" to update the system between releases more often than something else.
- g947o 8mo ago
  I take it as no more than someone's personal opinion, since there is no reference provided whatsoever.
- p_ing 8mo ago
  Typically you want stability and predictability in a server. A platform that has a long support lifecycle is often more attractive than one with a short lifecycle. If you can stay on v12.x for 10 years versus having to upgrade yearly yo maintain support, that’s ideal. 12.x should always behave the same way with your app where-as every major version upgrade may have breaking changes. Servers don’t need to change, typically. They’re not chasing those quick updates that we expect on desktops.
  - zuntaruk 8mo ago
    Yeah, and that's the take I assumed to hear based on what was said. However, for something like ARM and the use case this particular device may have, in reality you would _want_ (my opinion) to be on a more rolling release distros to pick up the updates that make your system perform better. I'd take a similar stance for devices that are built in a homelab for running LLMs.
    - p_ing 8mo ago
      Depends on what you're building an ARM system for. There are proper ARM servers out there; server work isn't the exclusive domain of x86, after all. For homelabs, that's out the window. Do whatever you want/fits your needs best. This isn't the place where you'd likely find highly available networks, clustered or highly available services, UPS with battery banks, et. al.

zuntaruk 8mo ago

I'd also love to hear what folks have to say about this. For myself I've had nothing but positive experiences running Fedora on my servers.

avhception 8mo ago
I think it's highly circumstantial. For example, my personal servers run a lot of FreeBSD and even though I could stay on major releases for a rather long time, I usually upgrade almost as soon as new releases are available. For servers at work, I tried running Fedora. The idea was that it would be easier to have small, frequent updates rather than large, infrequent updates. Didn't work. App developers never had enough time to port their stuff to new releases of underpinning software, so we frequently had servers with unsupported OS version. Gave up and switched to RockyLinux. We're in the process of upgrading the Rocky8-based stuff to Rocky9. Rocky9 was released 2022.

INTPenis 8mo ago

It's more maintenance due to its frequent release cycles, but it's perfectly good as a server OS. I've used it many times, friends use it. You can't mess up the release cycle because their package repos drop old releases very quickly, so you're left stranded. A friend recently converted his Fedora servers to RHEL10 because he has kids now and just doesn't have the time for the release cycle. So RHEL, or Debian, Alma, Rocky, offer a lot more stability and less maintenance requirement for people who have a life.