[TriLUG] Linux Distribution for server Opinions

[Roy Vestal]

Woohoo!! +1 for Solaris!

Oh and um...CentOS 5.2 as well;)


I'm running Web, Wiki, MySQL, DNS, DHCP (as a kickstart server), on  
various server makes/models (all SCSI btw) of CentOS 5.x. No issues so  
far. Just installed the packages, config'd the services as needed, and  
they just work. :)

I'm sure that those more familiar with Debian/Ubuntu will say the same  
thing about their server products.


On Jan 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Scott G. Hall wrote:

> I've just had the recent pleasure of evaluating a number of  
> distributions
> for building a couple of servers, testing each for a couple of weeks  
> and
> putting them through several what-if paces:
>
> CentOS 5.2
> Novell SuSE 10.1
> OpenSuSE 11.1
> Ubuntu 8.04
> Xandros Professional 4.1  (I had it on hand to try anyway ...)
> FreeBSD 7.1
> Solaris 10
> OpenSolaris 2008.11  -- under evaluation now
>
> Sorry, but RHEL wasn't evaluated -- not my call, due to a problem with
> free eval program and installation media.  Now that 5.3 has been  
> released,
> I'll see if I can't take a look at it as well.  I also wonder how  
> Fedora
> compares.
>
> In the recent past I've had bad experiences with Mandriva and Knoppix,
> so I didn't even bother evaluating them this time around.
>
> Besides a communications server, as you are looking at (same  
> applications),
> I am evaluating for an internal company webserver, developers server
> (a wiki, CVS repository, doxygen, etc), and Microsoft services server.
> Each of my tests was done on the identical x86 hardware (NOT 64-bit),
> a 586 build of the OS and packages if possible, 386 build otherwise.
> Goals also included evaluating security, ease of administration,  
> overall
> performance -- not just speed, but handling failures and failovers and
> recovery, diagnostics, various storage devices, and complexity and  
> cost
> of maintenance.
>
> A desire, if time and resources are available, would be to test the
> frugal linux distros: Slackware, Puppy Linux, Damn Small Linux, Vector
> Linux, and so on.
>
> I found that the commercial editions: Novell, Solaris and Xandros,  
> were
> at the top of stability, setup, and maintainability.  An overall
> impression was that they just felt solid.  Of course, they were the
> most expensive initially, but I see a good reduction of maintenance
> and administration costs in the long run.
>
> Compared to their commercial counterparts, OpenSuSE and OpenSolaris
> just didn't work out as well.  I had package installation problems,
> configuration problems, and numerous crashes due to incompatibilities
> between packages.  Also their performance did not seem as fast, though
> the difference in the measurements are negligible.  The free version
> of Xandros evaluated the same as their commercial version, after you
> added and configured the packages on your own -- you just don't the
> proprietary Microsoft addons.  The cost savings of using the free
> version of each of these is far offset by the time and effort involved
> in getting them setup, and their commercial versions are more solid.
>
> CentOS was a solid performer, though it did take a bit to get it
> installed and setup.  It and FreeBSD fell in the middle of the range
> of criteria.  The various Ubuntu's (Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu) all
> were identical (who runs a GUI desktop for a server?), and were right
> behind, but I did have problems with the configuration of several
> packages and a few performance hiccups.
>
> I would choose Novell's commercial SuSE if you need better Microsoft
> support, because the integration of proprietary software.  Otherwise
> SuSE and Sun's Solaris are pretty much an even match, followed closely
> by Xandros.  I wish I could see how RHEL would fare compared to these.
>
> My next choice would be either CentOS or FreeBSD.  I wonder if Fedora
> Core would fall here as well, or compare with the above?  Ummmm ...
> Ubuntu falls a little behind.
>
> I would stay away from OpenSuSE, OpenSolaris, and from other recent
> experience, Mandriva and Knoppix.  There is way too much stability
> problems, dependency on the GUI for administration, and far too much
> babysitting needed to make these run well.
>
> Good luck!
>
> Steve Kuekes wrote:
>> I'm finally replacing my 4 year old email server at work with
>> something more up to date.   I think its running old Redhat 9
>> (pre-Fedora)
>>
>> This will be a server that is on a dedicated T-1 link to the internet
>> hosted on our in-house corporate network.
>>
>> These are the applications that I'm planning on running on the  
>> server.
>>
>> * DNS
>> * Dovecot, postfix, mysql for an IMAP email server for multiple  
>> domains
>> * Openvpn for secure remote access to our internal network
>> * Webmail access to the IMAP server (I'm looking for a good open
>> source webmail package, let me know what you think about this too.)
>>
>> I don't care about GUI management apps like the Fedora
>> system-config-??? apps as I manage the system from SSH and the  
>> command
>> line, mostly.
>>
>> I've been using Fedora for my other Linux servers, but I'm looking to
>> see if there is something that is better.  I've had problems with yum
>> getting access to update servers for older versions.  It also seems
>> that Fedora doesn't have standard rpm's for dovecot and postfix using
>> mysql as the authorization and configuration database.  Everyone  
>> seems
>> to be using Ubuntu, so maybe I should join the party there??
>
> -- 
> Scott G. Hall
> Raleigh, NC, USA
> ScottGHall at BellSouth.Net
>
> -- 
> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>