CentOS - Mar 2007 - Wait for 5 or just use 4.4?

I'm a relative newbie to all this so pardon me if the following are all
stupid questions.

Firstly, I'm setting up a web server and gone from planning to use Ubuntu
(due to some familiarity as a desktop at home) to CentOS based on
recommendations by experienced webhosters.

However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point where it's
transitting to a major new version. So the key question for me is, should I
wait for CentOS 5 to be released or just go for 4.4?

Being rather new to Linux, my attempts to try to figure out the differences
between the two has been rather futile since I can't readily tell what is
really important to me or not. All that I think I'm sure of now is that 5
would support virtualization using Xen and 4.4 doesn't have it. This alone
is food for thought since the idea of being able to compartalize each
website in their own VM sounds good in the long run.

I'm tempted to wait for 5 since I'm reluctant to run the risk of having
to
upgrade a live server to version 5 and have it failed specutacularly if I
screw it up. On the other hand, it's uncertain when 5 will be out and
definitely waiting more than another 2 weeks isn't quite acceptable without
compelling reasons.

Hence I'll appreciate it if the knowledgeable folks on this mailing list can
advise which is the wiser route to go.

Some additional information which may be relevant to the decision.

1. RAID : Was planning to run "hardware" RAID 1 on the server and has
noted
comments that software RAID 1 on Linux may be better than raid 1 using
onboard firmware controllers.

2. Software that would be running on the server would include Apache
2.xwith ASPx support, php
5.x, MySQL 5.x, Exim, ProFTPD, Direct Admin (supposed to be developed on RH
and one user apparently tested it to work right out of the box with 5 Beta,
part of the reason why I decided to go with CentOS)

3. Hardware to be used would be Intel Core 2 Duo on an Asus P5B-VM-D0 (Q965,
ICH8-D0, Intel GMA3000 GPU) with SATA hard disks.

4. Network bandwidth control based on request IP or domains (i.e.
connections to IP #1 can be limited to 512Kbps, while connections to IP #2
can be limited to 1024Kbps, or connections to www.domainA.com is limited to
256Kbps etc.

Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070331/0e42a9a5/attachment.html>

On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 12:28:38AM +0800, Cen Tos wrote:
> I'm tempted to wait for 5 since I'm reluctant to run the risk of
having to
> upgrade a live server to version 5 and have it failed specutacularly if I
> screw it up. On the other hand, it's uncertain when 5 will be out and
> definitely waiting more than another 2 weeks isn't quite acceptable
without
> compelling reasons.
One option you might consider would be to install RHEL5 and then when CentOS 5
is released, "convert" (which is generally just a process of pointing
your yum
repo somewhere else and installing a couple CentOS RPM's, very easy to do on
the fly).

CentOS 4.4 of course will be supported for some years to come, but if the Xen
stuff is important to you, it's probably worth waiting.

Ray

> However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point 
> where it's transitting to a major new version. So the key
> question for me is, should I wait for CentOS 5 to be released
> or just go for 4.4?
I guess it depends on how conservative you are.

With 2 servers currently running CentOS 4.4, my plan is this: CentOS 4.5,
followed by 5.1.

Cen Tos wrote:
> I'm a relative newbie to all this so pardon me if the following are all
> stupid questions.
> 
> Firstly, I'm setting up a web server and gone from planning to use 
> Ubuntu (due to some familiarity as a desktop at home) to CentOS based on 
> recommendations by experienced webhosters.
> 
> However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point where 
> it's transitting to a major new version. So the key question for me is,
> should I wait for CentOS 5 to be released or just go for 4.4?
> 
> Being rather new to Linux, my attempts to try to figure out the 
> differences between the two has been rather futile since I can't
readily
> tell what is really important to me or not. All that I think I'm sure
of
> now is that 5 would support virtualization using Xen and 4.4 doesn't 
> have it. This alone is food for thought since the idea of being able to 
> compartalize each website in their own VM sounds good in the long run.
> 
> I'm tempted to wait for 5 since I'm reluctant to run the risk of
having
> to upgrade a live server to version 5 and have it failed specutacularly 
> if I screw it up. On the other hand, it's uncertain when 5 will be out 
> and definitely waiting more than another 2 weeks isn't quite acceptable
> without compelling reasons.
> 
> Hence I'll appreciate it if the knowledgeable folks on this mailing
list
> can advise which is the wiser route to go.
> 
> Some additional information which may be relevant to the decision.
> 
> 1. RAID : Was planning to run "hardware" RAID 1 on the server and
has
> noted comments that software RAID 1 on Linux may be better than raid 1 
> using onboard firmware controllers.
As you will discover reading Linux RAID documentation, onboard RAID is 
not real hardware RAID (like an add-in card). They call it fakeraid. You 
will almost certainly be better off with Linux software raid.
> 2. Software that would be running on the server would include Apache 2.x 
> with ASPx support, php 5.x, MySQL 5.x, Exim, ProFTPD, Direct Admin 
> (supposed to be developed on RH and one user apparently tested it to 
> work right out of the box with 5 Beta, part of the reason why I decided 
> to go with CentOS)
> 
> 3. Hardware to be used would be Intel Core 2 Duo on an Asus P5B-VM-D0 
> (Q965, ICH8-D0, Intel GMA3000 GPU) with SATA hard disks.
Here is where you will run into a bunch o' trouble with CentOS 4.4 -- 
the kernel for that is 2.6.9. I'm pretty sure you would not be able to 
support your mb and CPU out-of-the-box without a LOT of headache. Due to 
your hardware, I suggest you wait a little until CentOS 5 has been used 
by others with similar hardware. In fact I have a brand new system that 
uses Abit AB9 QuadGT motherboard (Intel P965 Express north bridge, Intel 
ICH8R south bridge, JMicron JMB363 for IDE), Intel Core 2 Duo E6600, 3 
Sata II disks. I fully expect to have my hands full getting this to work 
even in CentOS 5, and I have tons of experience. So my advice is to let 
others do the hard work for you and wait for the fruits of their labor. 
  I have recently put together another system that used an Asrock u-ATX 
mb that uses the Nvidia NF6100-430 AM2 chipset to be used as a 
firewall/DNS server/Mail server for a small network. This is currently 
running under CentOS 4.4 .... BUT, I ended up building kernel 2.6.20.1 
to better support my hardware (Nvidia onboard SATA controller, onboard 
Nvidia gigabit LAN [forcedeth]. The system is running great, but it took 
quite a bit of futzing to get it where it was more or less turnkey. And 
the newer kernel breaks a couple of things (like hotplug for USB because 
that subsystem on CentOS 4.4 is incompatible with the 2.6.20)
> 4. Network bandwidth control based on request IP or domains (i.e. 
> connections to IP #1 can be limited to 512Kbps, while connections to IP 
> #2 can be limited to 1024Kbps, or connections to www.domainA.com 
> <http://www.domainA.com> is limited to 256Kbps etc.
Netfilter will give you this ... I would suggest looking into the 
Shorewall firewall [http://shorewall.net] for stuff like this. Really 
wonderful set of software.

I will keep you updated on my progress with Intel P965/Core 2 Duo system 
on CentOS 5 once it is released.

Cen Tos wrote:
> I'm a relative newbie to all this so pardon me if the following are all
> stupid questions.
Nobody's born knowledgeable.
> However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point where 
> it's transitting to a major new version. So the key question for me is,
> should I wait for CentOS 5 to be released or just go for 4.4?
Wait for 5, it'll be out pretty soon now.
It has newer software that provides more features in general. Also, the 
focus of most contributors will move towards 5 very quickly, and you 
want to stay close to the spotlight, don't you?
> 1. RAID : Was planning to run "hardware" RAID 1 on the server and
has
> noted comments that software RAID 1 on Linux may be better than raid 1 
> using onboard firmware controllers.
This is a religious war, it's pretty hard to find unbiased opinion.

Both are fine. Soft RAID is quicker to setup and cheaper. Hard RAID 
gives you more options.
If you can't afford a good RAID card that can be replaced quickly in 
case something happens, use soft RAID.
If you do use hard RAID, make sure you back up the card's config and 
keep the backup in a safe place. Also make sure you either have a cold 
spare somewhere, or you can quickly purchase an identical card.
> 2. Software that would be running on the server would include Apache 2.x 
> with ASPx support, php 5.x, MySQL 5.x, Exim, ProFTPD, Direct Admin
CentOS 5 and RHEL 5 offer most of those software versions right off the 
bat. One more reason to wait for 5.

-- 
Florin Andrei

http://florin.myip.org/

On 3/31/07, Cen Tos <centos.admin at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I'm a relative newbie to all this so pardon me if the following are all
> stupid questions.
Nobody borns knowing  everything
The worse question is the no asked question
>
> Firstly, I'm setting up a web server and gone from planning to use
Ubuntu
> (due to some familiarity as a desktop at home) to CentOS based on
> recommendations by experienced webhosters.
>
> However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point where
it's
> transitting to a major new version. So the key question for me is, should I
> wait for CentOS 5 to be released or just go for 4.4?
>
>  Being rather new to Linux, my attempts to try to figure out the
differences
> between the two has been rather futile since I can't readily tell what
is
> really important to me or not. All that I think I'm sure of now is that
5
> would support virtualization using Xen and 4.4 doesn't have it. This
alone
> is food for thought since the idea of being able to compartalize each
> website in their own VM sounds good in the long run.
>
> I'm tempted to wait for 5 since I'm reluctant to run the risk of
having to
> upgrade a live server to version 5 and have it failed specutacularly if I
> screw it up. On the other hand, it's uncertain when 5 will be out and
> definitely waiting more than another 2 weeks isn't quite acceptable
without
> compelling reasons.
>
Then  go with   4.4
> Hence I'll appreciate it if the knowledgeable folks on this mailing
list can
> advise which is the wiser route to go.
>
> Some additional information which may be relevant to the decision.
>
> 1. RAID : Was planning to run "hardware" RAID 1 on the server and
has noted
> comments that software RAID 1 on Linux may be better than raid 1 using
> onboard firmware controllers.
>
> 2. Software that would be running on the server would include Apache 2.x
> with ASPx support, php 5.x, MySQL 5.x, Exim, ProFTPD, Direct Admin
(supposed
> to be developed on RH and one user apparently tested it to work right out
of
> the box with 5 Beta, part of the reason why I decided to go with CentOS)

Then wait for  CentOS 5  since  CentOS 4  has php4  or php5 if you use
centosplus
>
> 3. Hardware to be used would be Intel Core 2 Duo on an Asus P5B-VM-D0
(Q965,
> ICH8-D0, Intel GMA3000 GPU) with SATA hard disks.
>
> 4. Network bandwidth control based on request IP or domains (i.e.
> connections to IP #1 can be limited to 512Kbps, while connections to IP #2
> can be limited to 1024Kbps, or connections to www.domainA.com is limited to
> 256Kbps etc.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>

-- 
Leonel

Cen Tos wrote:
> 3. Hardware to be used would be Intel Core 2 Duo on an Asus P5B-VM-D0 
> (Q965, ICH8-D0, Intel GMA3000 GPU) with SATA hard disks.
thats a desktop motherboard, not really what I'd consider 'server' 
grade.   Now, if this is just a SOHO 'server', that may not matter, but 
if this is going into a colocation site to host production websites, I'd 
want a 1U or 2U server with niceties like hotswap hard drives, redundant 
power supplies, and ECC memory, perhaps one of the Tyan or SuperMicro 
servers.

Based on your software version requirements (php5, mysql5), I would wait
until CentOS 5 comes out. It shouldn't be too much longer now.

Unless you know your raid management software well, I'd recommend software
raid. Based on the motherboard, I'm guessing you won't see a performance
advantage for the 'hardware' raid.

Thanks.

On 3/30/07, Cen Tos <centos.admin at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> I'm a relative newbie to all this so pardon me if the following are all
> stupid questions.
>
> Firstly, I'm setting up a web server and gone from planning to use
Ubuntu
> (due to some familiarity as a desktop at home) to CentOS based on
> recommendations by experienced webhosters.
>
> However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point where
it's
> transitting to a major new version. So the key question for me is, should I
> wait for CentOS 5 to be released or just go for 4.4?
>
> Being rather new to Linux, my attempts to try to figure out the
> differences between the two has been rather futile since I can't
readily
> tell what is really important to me or not. All that I think I'm sure
of now
> is that 5 would support virtualization using Xen and 4.4 doesn't have
it.
> This alone is food for thought since the idea of being able to compartalize
> each website in their own VM sounds good in the long run.
>
> I'm tempted to wait for 5 since I'm reluctant to run the risk of
having to
> upgrade a live server to version 5 and have it failed specutacularly if I
> screw it up. On the other hand, it's uncertain when 5 will be out and
> definitely waiting more than another 2 weeks isn't quite acceptable
without
> compelling reasons.
>
> Hence I'll appreciate it if the knowledgeable folks on this mailing
list
> can advise which is the wiser route to go.
>
> Some additional information which may be relevant to the decision.
>
> 1. RAID : Was planning to run "hardware" RAID 1 on the server and
has
> noted comments that software RAID 1 on Linux may be better than raid 1
using
> onboard firmware controllers.
>
> 2. Software that would be running on the server would include Apache
2.xwith ASPx support, php
> 5.x, MySQL 5.x, Exim, ProFTPD, Direct Admin (supposed to be developed on
> RH and one user apparently tested it to work right out of the box with 5
> Beta, part of the reason why I decided to go with CentOS)
>
> 3. Hardware to be used would be Intel Core 2 Duo on an Asus P5B-VM-D0
> (Q965, ICH8-D0, Intel GMA3000 GPU) with SATA hard disks.
>
> 4. Network bandwidth control based on request IP or domains (i.e.
> connections to IP #1 can be limited to 512Kbps, while connections to IP #2
> can be limited to 1024Kbps, or connections to www.domainA.com is limited
> to 256Kbps etc.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070330/3150d3eb/attachment.html>

John R Pierce wrote:
> Morten Torstensen wrote:
>> 
>> I would think that Oracle would run pretty much out of the box on
>> RHEL5 (and CentOS 5), as the kernel/glibc is not bleeding edge and
>> Redhat works pretty close with Oracle (as they do with other
>> Enterprise software). That does not mean it is ready for production,
>> but it should be ready for testing and piloting.
>> 
> 
> indeed, I've heard Oracle flat out won't support you if you're
running
> on CentOS 4, even tho its functionally nearly identical to RHEL4 which
> is supported.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Same with Zimbra, even though it's pretty well documented in their wiki on
how to use CentOS.

Thanks!

Mark Schoonover *** Winner of the 2008 Best Psychic Award
IS Manager
American Geotechnical - California, Nevada and Arizona
V-> 858.450.4040 F-> 714.685.3909 C-> 858.472.3816

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Just tossing my $0.02.

On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 12:28:38AM +0800, Cen Tos wrote:
> However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point where
it's
> transitting to a major new version. So the key question for me is, should I
> wait for CentOS 5 to be released or just go for 4.4?
I, for one, won't be migrating or installing new servers with CentOS 5
for a while yet. I'll be probably only doing tests and adapting script and
procedures during the next 1 or 2 months.

Jumping to a new version on a prodution server right after it is released
is a bit too risky for my tastes.
> 1. RAID : Was planning to run "hardware" RAID 1 on the server and
has noted
> comments that software RAID 1 on Linux may be better than raid 1 using
onboard
> firmware controllers.
3ware :)
> 2. Software that would be running on the server would include Apache 2.x
with
> ASPx support, php 5.x, MySQL 5.x, Exim, ProFTPD, Direct Admin (supposed to
be
> developed on RH and one user apparently tested it to work right out of the
box
> with 5 Beta, part of the reason why I decided to go with CentOS)
If you want php 5.x and MySQL 5.x, you definitively should wait for CentOS 5.
> 4. Network bandwidth control based on request IP or domains (i.e.
connections
> to IP #1 can be limited to 512Kbps, while connections to IP #2 can be
limited
> to 1024Kbps, or connections to www.domainA.com is limited to 256Kbps etc.
As far as I'm concerned, this kind of thing should be no different in either
of the 2 versions.

- -- 
Rodrigo Barbosa
"Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur"
"Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGDffDpdyWzQ5b5ckRAtpRAKC1UXPPgNcYcF6Ggl9VEwWl8KtN6wCfTBm3
ExDC/iKR6XXI1PhVCTE07zI=h/xE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Cen Tos wrote:
> I'm a relative newbie to all this so pardon me if the following are all
> stupid questions.
> 
> Firstly, I'm setting up a web server and gone from planning to use
Ubuntu
> (due to some familiarity as a desktop at home) to CentOS based on
> recommendations by experienced webhosters.
My main objection to the Ubuntu family is that, while there's an 
enormous supply of packages available, there's only a relatively small 
set that's supported with security ubdates. Likely, that set probably 
compares fairly well with RHEL and SLE{S,D}, it's awfully easy to get 
stuff from universe because it's there, and forget its lack of support.

Debian's a good alternative to Ubuntu; while it doesn't have the polish,
some has definitely rubbed off, and all of Debian's supported.

OTOH, if anyone mocks Debian for never releasing a new release, well, 
Debian has earned that reputation. It announced a new release for Dec 
2006, but it hasn't actually appeared yet.

All that said, I do have some Debian systems, and I don't intend to 
replace them with anything different. Debian's kinder to more modest 
hardware.
> 
> However now that I looked into CentOS, I find myself at a point where
it's
> transitting to a major new version. So the key question for me is, should I
> wait for CentOS 5 to be released or just go for 4.4?
Well C5 will last longer - it will be supported after C4 isn't,
Supposedly C5 is better than C4 - why else would RH be promoting RHEL5?

It seems you don't have a particular reason to go with C4 - no legacy 
apps etc.

fwiw I plan to install C5 on my laptop.

> 
> Being rather new to Linux, my attempts to try to figure out the differences
> between the two has been rather futile since I can't readily tell what
is
> really important to me or not. All that I think I'm sure of now is that
5
> would support virtualization using Xen and 4.4 doesn't have it. This
alone
> is food for thought since the idea of being able to compartalize each
> website in their own VM sounds good in the long run.
Yes, but don't get too carried away with that. atm one needs real RAM 
for each guest. On zSeries folk run guests in 64 Mbytes virtual, but 
their VM has been evolving for around 40 years, and it runs on damned 
good hardware.
> 
> I'm tempted to wait for 5 since I'm reluctant to run the risk of
having to
> upgrade a live server to version 5 and have it failed specutacularly if I
> screw it up. On the other hand, it's uncertain when 5 will be out and
> definitely waiting more than another 2 weeks isn't quite acceptable
without
> compelling reasons.
Plan for 5, it will probably be ready before you.
> 
> Hence I'll appreciate it if the knowledgeable folks on this mailing
list
> can
> advise which is the wiser route to go.
> 
> Some additional information which may be relevant to the decision.
> 
> 1. RAID : Was planning to run "hardware" RAID 1 on the server and
has noted
> comments that software RAID 1 on Linux may be better than raid 1 using
> onboard firmware controllers.
> 
> 2. Software that would be running on the server would include Apache
> 2.xwith ASPx support, php
> 5.x, MySQL 5.x, Exim, ProFTPD, Direct Admin (supposed to be developed on RH
Do you know how to use Exim? If not, I suggest you settle for postfix.
> and one user apparently tested it to work right out of the box with 5 Beta,
> part of the reason why I decided to go with CentOS)
Do check that any third-party stuff you might consider supports all 
these new releases. You do have the option of running C5 and C4 if 
necessary.

> 
> 3. Hardware to be used would be Intel Core 2 Duo on an Asus P5B-VM-D0 
> (Q965,
> ICH8-D0, Intel GMA3000 GPU) with SATA hard disks.
> 
> 4. Network bandwidth control based on request IP or domains (i.e.
> connections to IP #1 can be limited to 512Kbps, while connections to IP #2
> can be limited to 1024Kbps, or connections to www.domainA.com is limited to
> 256Kbps etc.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu

Please do not reply off-list

Just an update, I didn't get the board I wanted originally, it was out of
stock. So as an alternative, I got the Intel DQ965 instead, which appears to
be practically identically to the Asus P5B-VM-DO.

Apart from a noob mistake thinking I didn't need GRUB if this was an going
to be a single OS system, everything appeared to work right. All my worries
about the problems I found online regarding the Intel 82566DM Gigabit
controller turned out to be unfound. Since I also used a SATA DVDRW to
install, there was no issue with the Q965 chipset not having native IDE
support.

Now I just need to add another NIC and figure out the rest of the stuff like
getting httpd and mysql to start on their own :)

Thanks for all the responses!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070402/b4cc59ed/attachment-0004.html>