I have always assumed that Manjaro (and Arch based distros) are not best for servers because it less stable and having too many updates compared to like Debian. Also I though it would be harder to manager a Arch based system. I thought that Manjaro is better for desktops while Debian is better for servers. Am I wrong? Does anyone use Manjaro as servers for like web hosting or something. Is Manjaro used for production servers?
Hi @jaden,
That is a really good question that I’d like someone else’s opinion to as well.
My personal opinion is the same as yours. I suspect for the same reason. Being that Manjaro is rolling release and Debian is point release. So, in my opinion there would be less breaking fhanges with Debian than Manjaro, ultimately resulting in a more stable system with less possibility for downtime. But, I’m open-minded and willing to hear other opinions.
1 Like
Manjaro is specifically desktop focused distro, while Debian has also server focus. Of course Debian is better for servers.
Manjaro can be fine for home server, and even some production use cases, but it will require a lot more maintenance than debian. You don’t want that if you maintain a lot of servers. For 99% of use cases, you are better off with something like Debian or centos.
1 Like
Well I think you will have more success with Debian as a Desktop then you would using Manjaro for servers.
1 Like
That was my opinion as well, and why I’m sticking with Ubuntu, which is a Debian fork, for servers, even my home server, while my favorite desktop OS is Manjaro.
Good discussion on this topic in the archives post #11 and post #27.
Manjaro is not being tested for server use, you will need to test everything yourself.
That’s what I figured. Thank you!
You can also install docker to the Manjaro SRV and it is less to maintain
I have a Arch Linux Server (Hetzner) with Nextcloud (snap package) running, but this is really a time crapper sometimes 
At the end: it’s recommend to do KISS principle if you want a Server with rolling release distribution
Sure, but you still need to keep the underlying system up to date if you are going to expose it to the internet. But if its just home server without ports exposed to the internet, it doesn’t matter that much.
A minimalistic manjaro installation that just serves docker is not likely to break or cause issues. But then again, why would one use manjaro for that, when there are specialized distros for it?
2 Likes
From a security perspective, IMHO, a rolling release is better for a server because it will automatically have the latest software fixes…
Besides servers are by definition operated by people who have more knowledge as a normal desktop user.
Of course not all server operators fall into that category but they should not be running a server at all IMHO 
2 Likes
true, but other try to do that too, with security repos like debian
Ok… now my opinion… since I have manjaro and archlinux mirror running.
I was using Manjaro for 4 months on a VPS, ok well not a long time, but never had an issue. If you keep it simple and don’t make many unusual things, then nothing will break.
Also i am running archlinux on another VPS… runs smooth without any issues. But well only since Dec last year.
There is nothing wrong, if you have 1 or 2 servers running with a RR Distro… but if it comes to managing a server farm of 100 Server and more, then debian base systems have better tools for this for sure.
Rule 1: Make backups and snapshots.
Rule 2: If you skipped rule 1, then begin with rule 1.
Don’t install software for production from the AUR with a AUR Helper. Build and Update them yourself if it is needed with makepkg.
For myself: I create a git repo, where all my configs are saved and then i link them to the correct path. This way i have everything in place and everything is under version control.
4 Likes
Depends on your time price or on the money you want to pay for maintenance.
Might have some pros due to last version of software.
No issue on security : CentOs or Debian are “rolling updated” on security issues.
May i remind that “security fixes” in any distro is like Anti-Virus software?
Eg. they will always be behind the reality and only fix “confirmed” security flaws.
By using the latest sources you are actually walking on ground zero where you have fixes , that are not exploited yet or confirmed, before they can cause problems.
1 Like
A server is supposed to be really stable and safe, therefore the OS must use only thouroughly tested software components.
I don’t think a rolling release OS that uses the newest and latest software fits the description.
If you really want safe and stable, go for Debian stable, and if you want support on top of safe and stable, go for Redhat or Ubuntu server.
Also have a test server available where you roll-out the updates, and test if your critical software still works, before applying the updates to your production environment.
1 Like