I have the choice between Centos and windows server 2008 to deploy as a mercurial server.
I am pretty confident with both operating systems, although probably a little more with windows.
For this question assume I am equally confident with both Operating systems.
Which should I use with regard to ease of maintenance, stability and backups?
Or is there just no difference?
I would prefer the linux server. But you could use SCM-Manager, then it is very easy on Windows and Linux.
The one you're most comfortable with.
There's no point in installing CentOS / Windows if you've never used it and lose hours on configuration and other problems.
I'd go with CentOS simply to avoid the licensing fee. Plus it's just as easy to setup and configure as a Windows server if you know what you are doing.
Related
I'm currently developing a Python application and I would like to know if there are any ways to pack MongoDB and MySQL (or Postgresql) into the application. By packing I mean taking those application binaries and distribute them with the application files.
For example, Metasploit PRO has some applications like nginx, postgresql, java, ruby, etc... under /opt/metasploit (they come with the application setup), and I would like to know if that could be done with any Linux application. And if so, how could I "choose" what binaries are needed? Would they work for any Debian distro? Can any application follow that procedure? Could it be done with MySQL and MongoDB?
P.D: I would like to do this to distribute one unique application instead of having to "obligate" the user to setup the databases independently, and for pure curiosity.
Thank you very much in advance!
MongoDB already distributes its binaries as standalone binaries in the sense that everything needed for the database (or shell tools) to run is included in the respective binary (mongo/mongos/mongod).
However, these binaries are OS (Linux distribution)-specific. Meaning, for example, they dynamically link against libssl and libcurl and you need to have the right versions of those libraries on the host system. So, for example, a MongoDB binary for Ubuntu 14.04 is likely to not work on Ubuntu 16.04.
As far as I know MongoDB does not support building for "generic linux". Only specific OSes like Ubuntu 16.04 are supported.
With that said, you could possibly build a "portable" MongoDB yourself if you accept some limitations, since its source code is available:
You need to figure out how to build MongoDB on some linux distribution that gives you the baseline glibc that would be compatible with all of your targets.
You may have to forego functionality like TLS connections, or figure out how to link against openssl statically (probably non-trivial).
This would be easier with older MongoDB versions (4.0, 3.6) since they have fewer system dependencies.
I think you can pack the required services and your application as Docker image or Virtual Machine box.
As my experience, I used to package the MongoDB and other Linux CLI tools with my NodeJS web application into a VM box using Vagrant. Or you can use Docker if you prefer container-based application.
If you use Vagrant, the provisioning feature may help you to setup the database before running the application. Check https://www.vagrantup.com/docs/provisioning
I was wondering to install a server on my windows machine and came to know that it is best to install a 32bit version on a 64bit machine. Is it really required.
Why is it recommended?
I want to install it for study.
Installing 32-bit software on a 64-bit machine is not recommended. No one with any credibility would make this senseless recommendation.
A major disadvantage of 32-bit software is that it cannot use more than 4GB of RAM, because memory addresses must fit into the word size of the software. This is a serious deficiency for a database server, which benefits from extra RAM.
I did consulting for a major company who was having database performance trouble. They were using Windows Server. They had been adding extra RAM DIMMs, having heard that RAM can be used to increase caching resources, but no matter how much RAM they added, it didn't help.
I logged into their site and found they were using Windows Server 32-bit. They had been spending a ton of money on RAM, but their operating system could not see it.
I listened to the YouTube video you linked to, to hear the justification of the speaker. He seems to be saying that since Windows 64-bit is backward-compatible and can run 32-bit binaries, but the reverse is not true (Windows 32-bit cannot run 64-bit binaries), he thinks you should use 32-bit binaries because they will work on both architectures.
That's bad advice.
The better advice is: Make sure you aren't using Windows 32-bit.
Come on, it's 2018. The days of 32-bit platforms is long gone.
It is definitely not required. I would say that it's not even recommended. Any 64 bit machine will be able to run a 32 bit server, however, a 32 bit server will highly underutilize the processor, especially when performing complex or graphical operations
A project with the following technologies and components has surfaced: to up a Web stack solution initially composed with Ubuntu, JDK, JBoss, Spring MVC 3.0+, and MySQL.
In planning this project, I have been struggling to find answers to the following questions for first steps, best practices, and sequence:
1) Does the JDK (and JBoss) need to be installed as ‘root’? (I have seen articles that mention it is not a good idea to operate in root unless absolutely necessary due to the fatal consequences.)
2) Does Ubuntu need to be installed as a Server in order to accomplish all this, or can it also be installed as a Desktop? I have not been able to determine if having a JBoss and MySQL need to be installed on top of Linux as a server.
3) Does Maven need to be used within Spring STS in order to get JBoss, and MySQL (and in the future Hibernate) to work successfully together?
4) My intent is to install in this order: a) Ubuntu -> b) Java -> c) JBoss -> d) Spring STS -> and e) MySQL. Are there any blatant conflicts in this sequence?
JBoss will require Java (recommend Java 7) before it will do anything. I don't think it really "installs" per-say, but rather just unpacks to some directory (even if you install from the package manager, it just really extracts itself). I question your need for Spring since JBoss and Java EE in general really does everything Spring does, and better now-a-days. Unless you have a specific requirement for Spring, I'd question this extra dependency.
For linux - in a high level, any OS can be a "server", all it needs is to be capable of serving things (web pages, ssh connections, etc). In M$ world, different "levels" of the OS have been specially designed based on anticipated task/workload. So for example, while Windows 7 can indeed run as a server, it was not designed for it and therefore may not be optimized or include helper utilities and tools to make life easier as a sys admin of the system. Windows Server on the other hand does include all the "normal" server tools and lots of goodies to make maintaining and setting the server up easier.
In linux land, this is no such thing. Linux is the kernel that talks back and forth with the bare metal, etc... and Distro makers will take that and build an OS around the kernel, basically just attaching any packages they feel their distro needs... such as wget, or cat, or any other standard userland apps, plus some non-standard such as mysql or java or whatever they want.
Now, some distributions of linux will tailor themselves at being "server" ready, while others will tailor themselves at being a desktop OS. The difference? It's really just whatever default packages the distribution maker decides to include or not. For example, the overwhelming majority of linux servers are run completely headless, and therefore there is absolutely no reason to have X11 and a huge bloated GUI environment installed and/or running on that system... it's pointless. Also, an "average joe" user does not need MySQL installed by default on his desktop system since it would only bloat his system and he likely won't ever use it.
So basically it comes down to default installed packages.
Some linux server distros take this further and exercise extreme caution when making updates, patches, or new releases in the name of stability and security, while on the other hand most desktop distros are more haphazard with their updates since if it breaks a home users web browser, it's probably not a huge deal... but if a server update breaks the webserver application stack, now that's a serious problem.
So you'll find server OS's like CentOS (based on upstream RHEL) are extremely slow to bring in the "latest and greatest" features that desktop OS's get early on. Their goal is high security and long term stability.
Now, for Ubuntu. While I certainty know a lot of folks run Ubuntu as their server OS choice (partly due to Amazon choosing Ubuntu as the default linux VM for their ECS cloud), but I'd really question this. Ubuntu is not focused on being a server. It's focused on being a great all-around desktop oriented OS. Yes the LTS version is meant for long term stability, but it's based out of a desktop OS, so it's still not the focus.
IMHO, I'd go with CentOS because it's free and completely binary compatible version of RHEL - and RHEL is the de-facto standard for enterprise-grade linux servers. Be aware though, the RHEL way of doing things is a bit different than the debian way -- so there is no apt-get, you must use yum install instead. Startup scripts are different and some ways of doing things are different, but really, once you know linux, you know linux.
EDIT: Also check into Jenkins - its a free opensource continuous integration system that runs on JBoss or Tomcat or any other container, and can automagically pull your code from a repo (github, git, svn, etc) and compile/package it then push it to live deployment. You setup your ANT or Maven build scripts, and it can kick off on a schedule or however you configure it.
EDIT EDIT: I'd also recommend using OpenJDK -- as it's likely included in your package manager (for just about every disto) and will be more updated than the oracle version if it's in your package manager too. I've found most "server" distros will have OpenJDK 7 while only having Oracle java 6 in their package managers. Also, installing it via the package manager will enable you to keep it updated a ton easier.
Installed as root, why not? Run as root, probably not a good idea.
If you want a desktop, install a desktop distrib. If you want a server, install a server distrib. This doesn't change what can and can't be run in the OS. It only changes what is installed by default.
Maven is a build tool. JBoss doesn't care how you build your app. All it cares about is if the application you deploy is a valid Java EE application.
No. You need an OS, so Ubuntu must come first. JBoss and (AFAIK) Spring STS need a JRE to run, as they're Java applications, so Java should be installed before them. MySQL is independent of JBoss, STS and Java, so you can install it whenever you want.
Note that if you're struggling just with this installation part, be prepared to suffer with the rest. Building a Java EE webapp is not a piece of cake, and you should probably find some experienced developer to help you, as it seems you're only beginning with Java.
I have a VPS with Liquidweb, which currently uses a standard LAMP stack. I want to replace/supplement the installed version of MySQL with Percona, specifically to leverage XtraDB's advanced features. My initial request to their SysAdmins was they don't support that since its a nonstandard install.
My question is has anyone successfully run Percona in a WHM/Cpanel controlled environment? How did you install Percona? Did you have any problems? How do you maintain that installation? Were you able to have WHM "automatically" upgrade Percona, or at least prevent it from upgrading Percona down to MySQL? Is there a better way?
As a background, I am a software developer. I can run make, but managing a secure DB installation is beyond my scope.
http://www.ecommy.com/linux/install-percona-in-a-whm-cpanel-environment
also:
http://forums.cpanel.net/f5/installing-percona-mysql-track-queries-per-user-table-access-volumes-103477.html
The install is pretty straight forward. The database upgrading will not be managed within WHM/cpanel, so you would need to use your own method to administer updates. You should be able to install Maria in about the same matter.
I would personally keep a close eye on the installed database when cpanel does an update, just to make sure that it doesn't do something crazy like kicking the Percona version out. But, it should work without too much fuss.
I am currently running ubuntu 10.4, I would like to be able to run windows XP from within that machine, using vmware player/workstation. I am not sure which is better for my situation.
I need to verify my builds under a windows environment, which is why i need the vmware software, Does anyone have experience, running Hudson slaves on windows machine that is a VM, from a Linux machine that runs the master Hudson.
Are there any guides or tutorials on how to set this up, or practice that would speed up the process, and limit road blocks in the future.
Thanks.
Edit: VirtualBox would be just as useful. :) -- actually more interested in that.
Since you mentioned VirtualBox, there is a VirtualBox plugin for Hudson.