FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-04-2008, 07:43 PM
"James R. Jones"
 
Default ubuntu server

Hello,

Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I was
thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an old
version of redhat server with ubuntu server. I was wondering if people
think that ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is anyone using
it in a production environment and thoughts that they may have.


jim
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-04-2008, 07:58 PM
"Michael Varre"
 
Default ubuntu server

I've recently turned a whole bunch of my production FreeBSD servers into ubuntu systems over the past couple months.* From the standpoint of administration and manageability they all get two thumbs up.* The jury is still out from a security perspective however.* That is not to say I've had any problems with security on these systems, however in my case it is simply unproven (in my environment, with my applications).* I ran FreeBSD successfully for several years with minimal issues and time will be the true test for these ubuntu systems. I still have a few more to go and I dont expect any issues.

*
4 BIND9 servers
6 LAMP type systems
A few MySQL servers
A couple others with custom applications
A bunch of development servers
*
So far so good


On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM, James R. Jones <bnjrj@uaf.edu> wrote:

Hello,

Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I was thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an old version of redhat server with ubuntu server. * I was wondering if people think that ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is anyone using it in a production environment and thoughts that they may have.


jim

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users




--




mv
315.952.5753

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-04-2008, 08:14 PM
"Mark Haney"
 
Default ubuntu server

Michael Varre wrote:
> I've recently turned a whole bunch of my production FreeBSD servers into
> ubuntu systems over the past couple months. From the standpoint of
> administration and manageability they all get two thumbs up. The jury is
> still out from a security perspective however. That is not to say I've had
> any problems with security on these systems, however in my case it is simply
> unproven (in my environment, with my applications). I ran FreeBSD
> successfully for several years with minimal issues and time will be the true
> test for these ubuntu systems. I still have a few more to go and I dont
> expect any issues.
>
> 4 BIND9 servers
> 6 LAMP type systems
> A few MySQL servers
> A couple others with custom applications
> A bunch of development servers
>
> So far so good
>
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM, James R. Jones <bnjrj@uaf.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I was
>> thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an old version
>> of redhat server with ubuntu server. I was wondering if people think that
>> ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is anyone using it in a
>> production environment and thoughts that they may have.
>>
>> jim
>>


As far as I'm concerned the only difference between a linux /server/
version and a linux /desktop/ version (of /any/ distro) is that most of
the multimedia, desktop applications aren't included in the server
version. That has been the case with RHEL, Ubuntu, Suse, etc. Unless
it's an 'Enterprise', pay for version, the packages will be same. The
Enterprise versions that you typically pay for (like RHEL) the packages
are hardened to the gills and are usually several revs back from the
latest version.

So, for all practical purposes a desktop version /is/ a sever version +
'insert desktop apps here'.



--
Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt -- Caius Julius Caesar


Mark Haney
Sr. Systems Administrator
ERC Broadband
(828) 350-2415

Call (866) ERC-7110 for after hours support

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-04-2008, 09:32 PM
Sam Przyswa
 
Default ubuntu server

James R. Jones a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I
> was thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an
> old version of redhat server with ubuntu server. I was wondering if
> people think that ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is
> anyone using it in a production environment and thoughts that they may
> have.

We use, like you, Ubuntu on workstations but our servers are on Debian
Etch, after some problems with Ubuntu server, in my opinion Linux
servers on Debian is the most stable and efficients option.

Sam.



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-05-2008, 01:23 AM
"Michael Varre"
 
Default ubuntu server

James I'm curious, what sort of problems have you encountered with
Ubuntu Server that were averted by using Debian?



On 8/4/08, Sam Przyswa <samp@arial-concept.com> wrote:
> James R. Jones a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I
>> was thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an
>> old version of redhat server with ubuntu server. I was wondering if
>> people think that ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is
>> anyone using it in a production environment and thoughts that they may
>> have.
>
> We use, like you, Ubuntu on workstations but our servers are on Debian
> Etch, after some problems with Ubuntu server, in my opinion Linux
> servers on Debian is the most stable and efficients option.
>
> Sam.
>
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>

--
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com





mv
315.952.5753

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-05-2008, 03:39 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default ubuntu server

Mark Haney wrote:

>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM, James R. Jones <bnjrj@uaf.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I was
>>> thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an old
>>> version
>>> of redhat server with ubuntu server. I was wondering if people think
>>> that ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is anyone using it in
>>> a production environment and thoughts that they may have.
>
> As far as I'm concerned the only difference between a linux /server/
> version and a linux /desktop/ version (of /any/ distro) is that most of
> the multimedia, desktop applications aren't included in the server
> version. That has been the case with RHEL, Ubuntu, Suse, etc. Unless
> it's an 'Enterprise', pay for version, the packages will be same. The
> Enterprise versions that you typically pay for (like RHEL) the packages
> are hardened to the gills and are usually several revs back from the
> latest version.
>
> So, for all practical purposes a desktop version /is/ a sever version +
> 'insert desktop apps here'.

- and of course, practically, you can assume that since it doesn't have all
that GUI stuff, it's probably more stable.

I administer a CeNTOS server, that I never cease to wish was Ubuntu...
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-05-2008, 04:53 PM
"Michael Varre"
 
Default ubuntu server

Derek, the primary difference between Ubuntu Server Edition and Desktop Edition is the fact that Server doesnt come with all the extra junk Desktop does, out of the box at least. They are pretty much the same just without "end user" type things such as productivity tools and X and give the ability to install LAMP during install.

*
All that functionality can easily be installed after the server install is complete - however its just not done by default.


On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Derek Broughton <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote:


Mark Haney wrote:

>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM, James R. Jones <bnjrj@uaf.edu> wrote:
>>>

>>> Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I was
>>> thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an old
>>> version
>>> of redhat server with ubuntu server. * I was wondering if people think

>>> that ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is anyone using it in
>>> a production environment and thoughts that they may have.
>

> As far as I'm concerned the only difference between a linux /server/
> version and a linux /desktop/ version (of /any/ distro) is that most of
> the multimedia, desktop applications aren't included in the server

> version. *That has been the case with RHEL, Ubuntu, Suse, etc. *Unless
> it's an 'Enterprise', pay for version, the packages will be same. *The
> Enterprise versions that you typically pay for (like RHEL) the packages

> are hardened to the gills and are usually several revs back from the
> latest version.
>
> So, for all practical purposes a desktop version /is/ a sever version +
> 'insert desktop apps here'.


- and of course, practically, you can assume that since it doesn't have all
that GUI stuff, it's probably more stable.

I administer a CeNTOS server, that I never cease to wish was Ubuntu...

--
derek





--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users



--




mv
315.952.5753

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-05-2008, 05:45 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default ubuntu server

Please don't top post.

Michael Varre wrote:

> Derek, the primary difference between Ubuntu Server Edition and Desktop
> Edition is the fact that Server doesnt come with all the extra junk
> Desktop does, out of the box at least. They are pretty much the same just
> without "end user" type things such as productivity tools and X and give
> the ability to install LAMP during install.

>> - and of course, practically, you can assume that since it doesn't have
>> all that GUI stuff, it's probably more stable.

Are you suggesting that what you've said and what I said are incompatible?

X itself is a _huge_ source of potential problems. There's no guarantee
that an Ubuntu RTS server is more stable than the same version of Ubuntu
RTS desktop, but the _probability_ is high.
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-05-2008, 11:48 PM
"Michael Varre"
 
Default ubuntu server

I'm not questioning compatility between ubuntu and other flavors, just
that, iMHO the apt-get system seems to work much better than other
equivelants out of the box, from redhat yum/up2date to freebsd ports
system. Again, that's just in my own experience.



On 8/4/08, Sam Przyswa <samp@arial-concept.com> wrote:
> James R. Jones a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> Since I have been very pleased with ubuntu 8.04 on the workstation I
>> was thinking of replacing a test system that is currently running an
>> old version of redhat server with ubuntu server. I was wondering if
>> people think that ubuntu server is ready for prime time use and is
>> anyone using it in a production environment and thoughts that they may
>> have.
>
> We use, like you, Ubuntu on workstations but our servers are on Debian
> Etch, after some problems with Ubuntu server, in my opinion Linux
> servers on Debian is the most stable and efficients option.
>
> Sam.
>
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>

--
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com





mv
315.952.5753

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 11-08-2009, 08:16 PM
Dhiraj Chatpar
 
Default ubuntu server

I am facing issues with the ubuntu server. my load average is 100. i want to optimize my system in order to bring this down or use my hard disk as swap like i do in windows.. is that possible
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:47 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org