hi

which one you will go for if you have a choice of Fedora core 2 or CentOS, with cpanel servers.

1- security.
2- cpanel compatibility.
3- performance.
4- updates.

I currently got few box with cPanel and CentOS 3.1, running very smooth, fast, and secure.

Nevet tried Fedora c2, but I did have one with FC1 it was ok.

Thought I heard some bad things about FC2 + CPanel (stable issues), but never tried it myself so I can't say it for sure.

My suggestion - CentOS 3.1 .


Best regards,
Gil.

There has definetly been some issues out there about Fedora Core 2/cPanel compatibility issues. As for CentOS, I haven't heard a single bad thing about it yet. It is supposed to be a clone of RHE so you can expect it to be a stable platform.

CentOS == RHEL.

We now run CentOS on all Cpanel servers and had run a couple of servers for a couple of months. We have no compatability issues or stability issues.

The code is pretty much Redhat's for RHE 3 so you can pretty much expect good speed on patches and quality of code. On top of that, given that Cpanel was originally very much based on Redhat structure, compatibility isn't an issue.

But how it compares to Fedora Core 2, I can't tell. But I didn't pick fedora Core 2 simply because RHE is expected to have a much longer support life time as RH had promised to support it for at least 5 years, while Fedora has a much shorter lifespan of supporting it only for 2 releases before transferring it to Fedora Legacy which to be frank have been quite slow so far. In fact, Fedora core 1 is going to be transferred to Fedora Legacy by Sept this year. Just 6 months of strong support is not good enough for me. I don't really like to upgrade tons of boxes all the time...

Got with Centos, fedora core 2 is not fully supported by cpanel yet.

thanks guys that is all what i wanted to make up my mind with centOS.

what a wonderfull team here

Originally posted by Boost
thanks guys that is all what i wanted to make up my mind with centOS.

what a wonderfull team here

Sounds great mate :),

Good luck!
Gil.

I have had hardware problem with FC2 (SCSI controller though), do you think RHE / CentOS would be able to support it?

We have SMP stablity issue with Fedora, but i forgot if it was core 1 or core 2 that is having problem.

thanks for asking this question. I think i probably go fo CentOS for my next box.

Originally posted by UltraUnixNET
I have had hardware problem with FC2 (SCSI controller though), do you think RHE / CentOS would be able to support it?
Sounds like a kernel rather than distribution problem. What was the SCSI controller?

Originally posted by demonmoo
Sounds like a kernel rather than distribution problem. What was the SCSI controller?

Distribution can play a part in it.

Originally posted by thelinuxguy
Distribution can play a part in it.
In terms of what kernel the include & the modules, or in another way?

I think it was adaptec scsi controller

Originally posted by UltraUnixNET
I think it was adaptec scsi controller
Can you remember the modle number or chipset?

Go with centOS

I don't get it, why people has so much problems with Fedora?
I have both fedora core 1 and core 2 on different servers. After RH9, it is working perfect.

You can't really compare Fedora with CentOS because Fedora considered as a beta product. Its a beta for RHEL where CentOS is basically RHEL minus RedHat proprietory software .. so I would definitely go with CentOS.

CentOS is the free version of RHE ;)

Yeah, I vote for CentOS too :D

Do not go with Fedora IMO as like another said, it's more of beta os. I gave it a shot on a fresh install with a server and cpanel, it was nothing but problems. Thing didn't compile correctly, it gave cpanel improper readings. Lets just say it was more of a hassle than what I was willing to deal with.

That particular server is now running RH9 with very few minor problems here and there such as randomly having bind fail and not copying correct directories over.

I have not had a chance to touch CentOS but, between CentOS and Fedora, go with CentOS.

My $0.02 :)

is there a x86_64 distribution of CentOS? or just i386....

what is support status of SATA controllers for CentOS v3.1?

Just remember, CentOS is really RHEL minus some copyrighted packages from Red Hat...so it has the same issues that RHEL has.

That being said, CentOS is awesome, but it has the Disk IO problems/IOwait issues that RHEL has too with some hardware raid cards, like the 3ware SATA controllers.

Originally posted by TomK
That being said, CentOS is awesome, but it has the Disk IO problems/IOwait issues that RHEL has too with some hardware raid cards, like the 3ware SATA controllers.

Is this still an issue?

I had intended to research this issue along with RAID + RHES and thought this would have been solved by now. I was told by someone today it was no longer a problem on the 3ware cards (granted, the person who told me was a sales rep trying to sell me some £2k+ servers :) ).

Hey Jim,

Oh, it is still very much a problem, for us anyhow. We've had it on the 3Ware 8506 and the new 3Ware 9500 cards, with the RHEL kernels as well as 2.4.26 and 2.6.7.

Have not tried 2.6.8 yet.

Tom

That being said, CentOS is awesome, but it has the Disk IO problems/IOwait issues that RHEL has too with some hardware raid cards, like the 3ware SATA controllers.

The feedback that we've had from customers running 3ware 9500S-4LP SATA RAID controllers with 3x SATA HDDs in RAID5 under RHES3 has been very good indeed. It may well be that there are some issues out there, but we have quite a number of servers with this configuration under RHES and haven't had any negative feedback at all.

Incidentally, we're running that configuration with Fedora Core 2 (devel) as a test box in the office here and it's blindingly quick (60mb/sec under RAID5 with normal 7200RPM SATA drives).

CENT OS is perfectly fine - Fedora Core 2 is a pos imho

TomK when is your website goign to be finally up? been almost a year

We still have the high IOWait and lock-ups now and then with RHEL/CentOS and 3Ware 8000 and 9000 series.

Site, it's been 3 years actually.....soon.

hahah okay :D Can i be privy to the opening release of your site via pM?

I just ordered one server with CentOs today, hope I can test it out and will give feedback here ;-)

I had my admin installed CentOS after he explained to me between FreeBSD, CentOS, Fedora...

Hi,
Where do you download centos 3.1 from?
I tried all the links at centos.org
Thank you!

Hi.

I'm using CentOS. It seems very fast and stable. Zero problems.

G'day all!

How does cpanel perform on freebsd?

I'm a big fan of CentOS, we install it on all our shared hosting boxes and it works great. Customers of ours using it with cPanel also seem to be happy.

CentOS didn't release the 2.4.21-20 release yet that, have they?

I can't find it on their mirrors. And no one responded on their mailing lists.

ok

after 4 months of this post I really had to come here and admit that nothing was better than RH9.

yes FC2 has some problem with cpanel but still acts much better than centOS as a matter of fact it is iowait problem which kills the server even with none smp kernels, am still having one box with RH9 that I think I will keep it for ever with RH9 if RHE/centos does not solve the iowait problem.

and it seems no one could come with a real solution for this yet, some do adive 2.6.* kernels but again it seems it did not solve the iowait problem 100 %

thanks

Can some kind person explain a little more of what the high iowait problem is, and how it would impact a server?

Is it something that only triggers when there is more than one HDD in the server? Or could it occur if you have only one hard drive? If so, that's pathetic

barianoz

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=229306

you will know the story

I am very satisfied with Centos

Installing or upgrading anything is really easy & painless with yum