New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Best OS for R1Soft Server? CentOS vs Debian vs Ubuntu
nqservices
Member
Hi all,
For the first time I need to setup a R1Soft backup server and after I read their docs I can see that the "Server Backup Manager" can be installed in both CentOS 7, Debian 8 and Ubuntu 16.
I'm comfortable managing all this OS's, but I wanted to know from someone with experience running R1Soft if there is a preferable OS's?
I mean, sometimes companies advertise that their software can run is all OS's, but many times there is one specific OS where the software "works better"... normally the OS used by most of the software developers.
So what do you think guy's? for R1Soft, CentOS 7, Debian 8, Ubuntu 14/16?
Note: The server will only run/host R1Soft Server Backup Manager.
Thanks
Poll not found
Comments
Might as well install Ubuntu 16 since it includes everything by default..
What in "specific" do you mean with "everything"?
Thanks
"All of the stupid shit you'll never use is already there." CentOS 7 isn't any better, really. I'd use Debian, just because it has saner defaults- but whatever works for you (and you are familiar with customizing) is what you should use.
We run some R1S servers in CentOS with no issues.
Anyone running R1Soft servers with Debian 8?
>
A minimal install of CentOS 7 is pretty barebones.
I have pretty much the opposite opinion of Debian.
Run it with whatever you want no distro can polish that turd.
Other than RAM use and disk footprint, sure..
I'm not the biggest fan of Debian anymore, either.
Can I ask why?
Centos with no issues.
You mean beyond systemd? I played with the 9 preview, and I just don't like the direction it is taking. It was having a check of an issue with the MBR layout, but once I completely blottoed the drive and made it GPT, it would finally boot reliably.
The services are getting larger, and starting to use even MORE RAM; even with a minimal setup, it's getting big and hungry. Fairly standard tools are not there anymore, it's a pain in the ass dealing with the bloated subsystemd that is trying to do everything- which isn't very UNIXy at all.
I like Void. http://www.voidlinux.eu/ - it has a very simple init system, and is a rolling live release from the second you install it. It's very configurable, lean by default, and fast as hell.
change is hard
...
I am running Ubuntu 16.04 without any difficulty. Its running smooth. Try it.
>
A fresh CentOS 7 Minimal install: 108MB RAM, 950MB on /. It's not that big.
Alpine Linux is smaller, but it's a lot better then the regular jumbo sized install.
Was this using UEFI to boot?
It's modeled after the Windows service event loop.
Also possibly, launchd, but I haven't really looked at that.
Systemd is pretty awful. What's funny is originally they listed launching VMs and containers as one of the reasons behind it, but then the backed Docker for their container tech which want's nothing to do with being launched from systemd.
That's a freakin' gig, and you're going to need at least 192MB to hope to do anything useful with that.
Both yes, and no. HP EFI has been buggy for years, though. Never had a problem with Dell (until the next time I end up with it).
Changing the whole design at will because you think you have a better idea than what has worked perfectly since before your birth is generally the way you get shit like Node.
I actually really like Debian 9 and it seems like the basic installs are much cleaner. Most of my servers are now a mix of FreeBSD 11 and Debian 9. I really do want to throw OpenSUSE Leap on one of them eventually though just to play around with it.