'Enterprise' linux distros
 

Which one would you choose for hosting apps using Apache and PostgresSql? Interesting in stability / managability / support over cutting edge features.

Suse seems good from the literature... but then so does everything :)

apparently Linux ES is supported by Redhat with regular security updates, patches etc. no other reason from what I can make out.

if it is stability and security you are concerned with - all proper geeks swear by Debian.

Actually for stability and security one would choose OpenBSD, although I use the latest testing Debian at home personally.

RHEL isn't just about up2date and RHN, it has a lot of properietary RedHat code inside which is what marks it out from Fedora.

RHEL comes in two flavours, ES and AS, 4 being the latest version (update 2 I think). Enterprise Server costs a fair bit less than Advanced Server, which supports more CPUs and memory.

Just today I installed Apache and mod_perl with PostgreSQL on an ES3 machine with up2date, although I still need to manually compile the tsearch2 contribution, took me 20 minutes.

A lot of companies think it will save them £££s.. and in some cases it works, TCO drops.... But in my humble experience RHEL doesn't deliver on the reduced TCO front.

As Steve says, ES is cheaper than AS, and AS is bloody expensive.

And, if you need to run mission critical services, even on RHEL, think again, the support provided by RH is not up to scratch - no where near on a par with IBM, Sun or HP.

We tend to use it where we can do without a system for while, eg clusters of web servers doing the same thing.

But all that said.. it's better than the alternative... Windows!

I'm hoping to try out Solaris x86 at work soon - see if it works on certain manufacturers blade systems ;)

You tend to find it's for stability more than anything. Especially if running it on proprietry Hardware such a Pseries (IBM Servers). And the right O/S such as LINUX or AIX.

It's a shame RedHat support isn't so good. You'd think they'd make an effort!

If OpenBSD is tops for stabilty and security, I guess I should look at that! I'm downloading the VmWare image right now.

One question though... why OpenBSD over FreeBSD - given FreeBSD's greater popularity? Or are they much of a muchness

Thanks v. much :thumb:

Unless I am building a firewall etc. I use CentOS, it is opensource (FREE) redhat ES, it has free clustering, is stable, supports 64bit processors etc. etc. and forget "up2date", use "yum" instead.

OpenBSD is *very* good for stability and security, it is built mainly with security in mind.

Of course alot depends on how good are your in house support staff and if you need vendor support.

There is always SUN ;)

up2date with RHN does a lot more than yum, I don't believe you can use yum with RHN channel subscriptions either, which is ok if you don't want the support :)

Yeap thats my point, if you are using CentOS then you wont have a RHN subsription ;)

solaris x86

Maybe I've been on sparc/solaris too long but SuSe has too many 'quirks' for me to be totally comfortable yet...

Haven't had a go with opensolaris yet.

Hmm, reading that back it appears I am *slightly* biased :)


Steve

No, but you implied using yum on RHEL, at least I read it that way ;)

Steve, yes you are biased :) Opensolaris isn't totally open yet unfortunately.

I'm playing with OpenBSD right now and it seems pretty OK so far. Nice clean install by default which is better than the Linuxes I've used lately.

What he said....

Dave

Pah... nothing to do with the quality of your in house staff as to whether you *need* vendor support - a lot of large companies, especially financials avoid FREEWARE because there is no fall back for bug fixes etc... You can't preasure anyone into fixing the problem if it's been developed in someones bedroom. :p ;)

Of course - if that is not what you meant by this comment - apologises for jumping down your throat ;)

So Solaris over OpenBSD then?

indeed not what I ment, I did say "and if you need vendor support" ;)

Sorry.. bee in my bonnet today :rolleyes:

I'm sort of puzzled by where you are going with the quality of staff comment thou - is that relating to how well Linux can be implemented securely?

Out of interest, do you work for an ISP / web hosting company?


Another thing to mention is that a lot of companies now seem to be offering 'support contracts' for Linux, for example IBM will do you're Redhat support (not sure thats a good thing ;)).

I was more aiming at, implementing and supporting systems on linux/unix requires a greater expertise than using windows and there are less people with the right skills around.

Yeap sort of (Datacenters), but do consultancy work for all sorts of companies from the big boys to tiny start ups.

I see what you mean now :)

(Obviously) it tends to be easier if you already have a team support a flavour of Unix, they tend to transition to Linux easily and know what needs doing security wise etc..

Consulting eh.. bet your at home today then.. dialed in remotely, 'working' from home? ;)

well I am employed, they hire me out every now and then, but yeah Friday is work form home day :)

I used to be employed by a consulting arm of a vendor, if no revenue earning work was around, Friday was always a 'working' from home day.

working = late start, fry up, watch some films etc.. ;)

Anyhow.. sorry for taking the thread off topic TB.