SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS
-
Roh, roh!! Hot damn! I forgot to mention bhyve. It's the schnizzle. And I heartell the Evil Empire makes very good use of it.
Here's a bit of irony: SmartOS - hypervisor extraordinaire - also makes very good use of bhyve. Howsomever, there is glitch that horks up using it to run a fbsd guest. Sigh..
But whatever. Like I said, depends on use case and there are niches where I'd reach for Linux (if only to run as bhyve guest;). If you've not explored FreeBSD lately and looking for a R.O.S.S. platform, maybe worth a gander.
And finally, ooohh, la, laaaa... I got me a reputation at Mangolassi! Heh.
-
@openit said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
Someday I spinned OpenBSD, just to feel proud
OpenBSD - Only two remote holes in the default install, in a heck of a long time!
I've run several Dragonfly servers.
-
@black3dynamite said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
@scottalanmiller said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/open-source/opensuse-leap-ready-be-new-centos
I have yet to use openSUSE as a headless server.
Used to be our standard for many years.
-
@gotwf said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
@pattonb Have you given any thought to bailing on Linux entirely? FreeBSD is pretty good and no danger of becoming proprietary. I've used for decades. And the more and more Linux goes the wrong directions, the more and more I want to free myself of it entirely. Almost there.
FreeBSD is safe, but so is Linux. Linux hasn't changed any direction at all. A vendor making a distro of LInux has. FreeBSD downstream vendors have done the same thing. So FreeBSD isn't immune. It's just that calling something FreeBSD itself is like talking about Debian, which is every bit as safe as FreeBSD is from that perspective. So when comparing apples to apples (base, fully free and open distros) they are equal in all but popularity. If you try to compare FreeBSD to RHEL you will get some weird comparisons, or Debian to FreeNAS, or FreeBSD to Linux. Apples to oranges.
-
@gotwf Nope, been using Debian since the mid 90's, only really appreciating it in the last 10 years. rarely
have I been disappointed. Usually my error, or hubris. I use it for small smb's and served me very well. as the saying
goes "Debian, been very good to me" ( said with an accent for affect) -
@pattonb Well... I have been doing some testing recently.... I have a NodeBB instance that I need to migrate off CentOS-7. Reputedly, although mongodb dropped support for else but linsux, the freebsd mongodb port runs great. Cool. I have been watching and waiting with bated breath to test this out. Unfortunately, most all hosts hosting fbsd do so via kvm, wh/puts fbsd under the bus from the get go. Contrarily, fbsd's bhyve stuff is reportedly superior ... so.... now that I had access to latest and greatest fbsd-12-patchset I decided to put through the paces.
All was same, on minimally provisioned servers. Insanely minimal. But it is a kind of perverse stress test. VM's were courtesy MNX.io, g1.nano.
Conclusions: Shooting, as always, from the subjective hip:
-
MongoDB was consistently a tad bit faster on Debian 10.
-
MongoDB succeeded in crashing itself during one of the FreeBSD perf tests. I tried a bit of tuning, wh/helped a bit... but not enough and still crashed.
-
MongoDB dropped portability and has been coded Linuse only fore a while now. So not to be unexpected that would run best on Linux. So I'mma gonna' use Debian 10. Cuz I'mma not a fan of 'buntu, okay?
-
-
@gotwf said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
I have a NodeBB instance that I need to migrate off CentOS-7.
We just moved ML to Ubuntu.
-
@gotwf said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
Contrarily, fbsd's bhyve stuff is reportedly superior
If you wanted the best performance virtualization on your own hardware, you'd likely want LXC vs Jails rather than KVM vs Bhyve.
-
@gotwf said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
So I'mma gonna' use Debian 10.
Make sure you are using XFS. MongoDB specifically wants WiredTiger on XFS.
-
@scottalanmiller Yes. This I know. But this isn't bare metal but rather SmartOS hypervisor in a Triton datacenter. So I presume all is atop ZFS. I never delved deeper so honestly do not know.
-
@gotwf said in SAMIT: IBM Is Killing Off CentOS:
@scottalanmiller Yes. This I know. But this isn't bare metal but rather SmartOS hypervisor in a Triton datacenter. So I presume all is atop ZFS. I never delved deeper so honestly do not know.
Hopefully not, as ZFS isn't all that fast. But you need XFS touching WiredTiger... what's lower in the stack isn't what it is concerned with. You still control your own filesystem regardless of what the datacenter may or may not use elsewhere.
