Fedora on the server

[Michael Kearey]

Dave Oxley wrote:
> My company is buying a new Dell server (2x2.4GHz P4 Xeon, 2Gb RAM, 73Gb 
> RAID 1 SCSI) for our production customer facing web site and I have been 
> trying to decide on which Linux distribution to use. It needs to run 
> Apache, tomcat, sendmail, mysql, php and bind and have minimum downtime. 
> We normally have about 25Gb of HTTP traffic a month, but is likely to 
> double over the next 12 months. I am not fussed about having paid for 
> support (that's my job!)
> 
> I was going to choose RH9 (after deciding against Debian), but I just 
> found out about Fedora. Is Core 1 suitable for this type of environment? 
> Or would you recommend I go with RH9 or Debian.
> 
> Cheers.


I'll play devil's advocate - My experience with Fedora is quite good 
so far.

I have been running a no-X based server , readying it for production. 
Mine is a slightly odd combo. It's an authenticating 
gateway/firewall/router, with traffic shaping, runs a cacheing Bind, 
and has a HTTPd for configuration interface. It runs PostgreSQL for 
logging.

It typically gets more than 25GB traffic *through* it per month.

I have had no problems running it since FC test 1  :/ . Minimum down 
time is my primary need, and so far it's excellent.

I won't recommend Fedora. It's up to you, and the risk you are 
prepared to take.


Cheers,
Michael