Thanks for the Info @BS86 
2 Likes
I think itās pretty stupid decision on their part (although not much has changed really).
Also i try to imagine anyone sane using Arch Linux as a serverā¦ 
P.S. Even 
wouldnāt use Arch as a server, itās just too nuts.
4 Likes
Thanks @BS86 for the effort and clarification!
It has been an illuminating discussion to follow.
1 Like
So if i understand right Andreas Radke still does not confirm that lts is aimed at server use nor does he confirm that the stable kernel is aimed at desktop use.
Imho this means nothing to stake your claim that lts is config-ed for server use
At the end of the day, youāre here to use your computer in the manner you want.
Itās my recommendation. Definitely. Until I see compelling evidence otherwise, thereās no reason to change.
1 Like
I run my Thinkpad like an Arch Server. LTS all the way (Zen as backup).
2 Likes
Well - I for one donāt bother with it on my server. Any configs that āupgradeā it for server use are not of sufficient significance to matter to me. I have always viewed it as an āolder, more stableā version of the mainstream kernel - great as a fallback option, or as a potential trouble avoider for those not hung up on the ālatest and greatestā bandwagon (like me - I came to Arch-based because I wanted the newest kernel, but rarely needed it except when building a new box).
BTW, Arch-based make excellent servers for 99+% uptime - just not for 24/7. Mine goes down for 5 minutes (updates) most weeks - but thatās all.
minor note - Linux is not about the rigourous application of logic to all choices - especially if that application is by someone else!
2 Likes
I donāt think so. The fact that the maintainer considers server usage when building the kernel has no bearing on that recommendation. The fact that it is far more stable than the mainline kernel is still true.
That guide is about keeping your PC easy to maintain and limiting the chance of breakage.
Lastly, maintained with servers in mind doesnāt imply that it shouldnāt be used for desktop usage.
13 Likes
Except one would definitely want to set preempt=full when using on desktopā¦
Iām old enough to recall when the general advice was keep the last three kernels to increase likelihood of a successful boot. There were even scripts (probably still are) for doing that. With the LTS kernel, I kinda kept that mindset. Iād roll with the latest, but have the LTS as my backup. For a while, I was running āReal Time Kernelsā because I wanted to use my computer as a guitar amp (ala Guitarix) and latency is bad for that.
These days, kernels are generally a lot more stable and my mindset is shifted to, "Install whatever kernel you want/need, but always install the LTS kernel; if not as your main, then as your backup.
My overall experience running the LTS kernel is that is perfectly fine for general use. Although (and this is just a personal thing) it feels weird to have only one kernel on a linux distro.
I disagree with the OP, too. I run the LTS kernel on all my machines, and that is what I recommend to everyone.
The fact is, most users cannot tell any difference in performance or stability between using the mainline or LTS kernel. There is no noticeable difference in almost all cases. Therefore, you get absolutely no realistic value from running the mainline kernel. If Iām wrong on this, I still have to be corrected.
On the other hand, regressions and bugs are indisputably rarer on the LTS kernel, and therefore, by using it, you significantly lower the chance of being impacted by them. Kernel regressions have been known to cause filesystem corruption and similar problems, so itās not something that should be dismissed lightly.
The only use case for mainline kernel over LTS that I would recommend is when using very new hardware (half a year old at most), which is not yet supported by the LTS kernel.
4 Likes
Youāre not correct.
Lately heāve changed preempt to settings that can be useful for anything except desktop / multimedia system, so now on default LTS Kernel you can see significant change:
- Stutter (both video audio)
- Reduced gaming performance + stutter
- Sometimes even reduced I/O performance
Hereās a typical example on Fedora: https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/158fy6x/ive_turned_preemptfull_on_and_it_solved_most_of/
Luckily itās easily fixed by setting preempt=full kernel parameterā¦until heāll change some other important stuff like that because itās fOr ArCh SeRVErS 
2 Likes
I havenāt noticed any degradation you talk about, and a Reddit post is hardly a convincing source. On my main desktop, audio and video playback are buttery smooth, and on my laptop, they have always been crap.
But I can boot up the mainline or zen kernel to do some testing, itās not a problem. Do you have any idea for an objective benchmark?
1 Like
Not really, some games benchmark maybe would make sense?
Iāve noticed it in how KDE animations / window management behaved, as well as some audio stuff - itās pretty obvious.
OK, I take your word for it. But since itās purely anecdotal and I donāt seem to be impacted by it, Iāll continue with what I have. 
Or you can take my word for it + just set a freaking Kernel parameter because it mirrors what normal desktop kernel should do anyway.
P.S. And obviously donāt forget to update grub
1 Like
Sure, but why solve a problem which does not exist (at least in my, very limited, experience)?
1 Like
Because when your (very limited) experience will lead you into those annoying problems - youāll likely forget what could hit you and will spend a lot of time exploring some other possibilities that will lead you nowhereā¦
Iāll keep it in mind, if I ever experience any stutter in audio or video. Iāll even add a comment to my /etc/default/grub to remind myself to set it.
1 Like