Re: Linux distro - Mailing list pgsql-general

On 8/1/07, paolo@ecometer.it <paolo@ecometer.it> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I bought a Dell server and I am going to use it for installing PostgrSQL
> 8.2.4. I always used Windows so far and I would like now to install a
> Linux distribution on the new server. Any suggestion on which distribution
> ? Fedora, Ubuntu server, Suse or others?

There are several considerations to think about in choosing a
distribution.  Contrary to some other comments here I think it matters
a lot.

1. support
This is the #1 most important consideration, and why redhat/suse get
paid the big $$$.  For linux, there are only really two choices for
paid support, redhat and suse.  If you plan to pay to have someone fix
your box when it breaks, choose redhat in u.s.a. and suse in europe,
not sure elsewhere.  Also, enterprise distros are supported longer,
meaning you have to worry less about upgrading.  This has a downside
though, for example when redhat AS 5 was released the as 4 kernel (on
2.6.9) was starting to look really dated.

small aside: you asked about linux but solaris is a viable option in
this regard and is really doing some nice things working with the
community.  There is a fair amount of buzz around ZFS.

Non-enterprise kernels are generally moving faster but you have to be
more concerned about upgrades, security, etc.  I would avoid fedora
but have nothing but nice things to say about debian based systems
(ubuntu, debian) in terms of packaging and stability.  Generally, if
you go this route you will depend on support from the community and
from yourself.

2. performance
the general trend is better performance for newer kernels.  Since
redhat AS 5 just came out, this is mostly a wash but consider some of
the work going on in the linux scheduler and other things that might
be interesting from database perspective.  There are claims that the
source compiled distributions (the best of class is probably gentoo)
have a performance edge.

3. binary packaging
While I like the debian distros generally, I dislike the debian
packaging of PostgreSQL.  IMO, it's over engineered.  If you plan to
use binary packaging, you should understand the difference between the
binary packages of the distribution of interest.  RPMs are built and
provided by the postgresql community and are always up to date.   If
not RPM based, pay close attention to how often your binary packages
are updated because you may get stuck waiting for a bugfix otherwise.

You of course always have the option of compiling PostgreSQL yourself.
 IMO, this is a fine way to go but you have to monitor what is going
for updates, etc.

4. hardware support
enterprise distros either support hardware directly or can leverage
vendors to provide drivers which are usually binary RPMs.  Other
distributions generally derive hardware support directly from the
linux kernel.  The kernel actually moves very fast and actually there
is some advantages from having your hardware supported directly...for
example booting from  a hardware raid device is easier.  That being
said, driver quality for server gear is all over the map and it's a
real roll of the dice.

In summary, I think using an enterprise kernel is usually a better
choice for a database box.  If you don't want to spend any money the
best choice is probably CentOS.  However, I hear see tremendous buzz
around ubuntu in the desktop side of things and expect this ultimately
to translate into a play into the server market. I would actually
consider ubuntu server a reasonably choice but I would stick with an
LTS release if possible.  The main advantage of ubuntu is that since
it i generally regarded the best desktop distro you get a more uniform
environment if you develop in linux (which i highly recommend) as well
as deploy it on the server.

merlin