[solymar]

Hi all,

i am looking around for some opinions about mac os x against linux on Xserve G5. As far as i understood from this article linux has now full support for Xserve G5. On th other hand i am sure Mac OS X has better support. So, what about performances? We would use it for heavy database (postgresql) work. Have you got any idea?

[MacGorilla]

I would go with Mac OS X. The server version was gui tools for everything, its easy to set up and rock solid. (and it comes preinstalled).

[NeilCharter]

I would imagine that you would receive better support from Apple if you stick with Mac OS X. Also consider that the OS X is regularly updated to improve performance, stability and security. For linux, I imagine you would have to be a lot more proactive in that arena. You will save yourself a lot of time and effort with OS X.

The only reason I can think of using Linux is if the program / service you need can't be run of OS X.

In terms of performance, your guess is as good as mine. But if a linux system is more unstable, no performance gain is worth that.

[solymar]

Originally posted by NeilCharter:

In terms of performance, your guess is as good as mine. But if a linux system is more unstable, no performance gain is worth that.

Ok, so you mean it is more unstable than os x at the moment?
I am looking at ppc-linux oriented sites and i am getting good impressions there too.

[Kristoff]

I really don't know why anyone would use Linux over Mac OSX, considering they already paid for the Apple hardware.

[solymar]

Originally posted by Kristoff:
I really don't know why anyone would use Linux over Mac OSX, considering they already paid for the Apple hardware.

Well, i can answer for me. I am just considering all the choices. And if i am not wrong the Virginia Tech "Big Mac" is using apple hardware with a modified linux version, or not?

[Sarc]

Originally posted by solymar:
Well, i can answer for me. I am just considering all the choices. And if i am not wrong the Virginia Tech "Big Mac" is using apple hardware with a modified linux version, or not?

you are wrong

"The Power Mac G5 based cluster validated our belief in the large-scale cluster architecture, the radically different communications technology, the 64-bit G5 processor and Mac OS X as a large-scale scientific computing platform," said Erv Blythe, vice president of information technology at Virginia Tech. "We know that the Xserve G5 cluster node running Panther Server will deliver even more impressive cost/performance numbers at our Terascale Computing facility due to its server optimized architecture, CPU density and ground-breaking performance and innovative management tools."

[Mr Scruff]

There's nothing wrong with running Linux on PPC hardware, it would be a nice solution for a dedicated server. However there's nothing wrong with running OS X as a dedicated server either.

I would use whatever you are most familiar with.

[MPMoriarty]

Both Linux and Mac OS X are very stable and powerful operating systems. But where they differ is in the GUI aspect. Some people like Mac OS X and its interface, while others prefer Linux and their interface.

What it all boils down to is...

Which do YOU prefer to use more? Which OS is easier for YOU?

Mike

[Toyin]

Originally posted by solymar:
Hi all,

i am looking around for some opinions about mac os x against linux on Xserve G5. As far as i understood from this article linux has now full support for Xserve G5. On th other hand i am sure Mac OS X has better support. So, what about performances? We would use it for heavy database (postgresql) work. Have you got any idea?

If you're asking this question than I assume that you are not familiar with 'nix type operating systems. If that's the case than stick with OSX. Having played with Linux PPC I can attest to the fact that it is stable, but it's about a thousand times harder to configure then OSX especially for a newbie.

[Big Mac]

Originally posted by MPMoriarty:
Both Linux and Mac OS X are very stable and powerful operating systems. But where they differ is in the GUI aspect. Some people like Mac OS X and its interface, while others prefer Linux and their interface.

What it all boils down to is...

Which do YOU prefer to use more? Which OS is easier for YOU?

Mike

AFAIK, no one on the planet prefers Linux's UI. Linux geeks drool over OS X. They just use Linux because they categorically reject closed source (regular) software.

[solymar]

well, i understand that most people are choosing Mac OS X for its ease of use and configuration.
I am more interested into a comparison of performance betweent these operating systems, as i am not new at Linux, but completely new to ppc hardware and Mac OS X.
What scares me of mac os x (ok, i am crazy maybe) is the gui itself, as it seems to me(but i have not tested mac os x that well) it's a bit too heavy.

[pliny]

why don't you just run both on the machine and test them out and then let us know how it went.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by Big Mac:
AFAIK, no one on the planet prefers Linux's UI. Linux geeks drool over OS X. They just use Linux because they categorically reject closed source (regular) software.

Or because they need to run > 2 processors, or they need to do particularly exotic configuration, or run on PCs, or a bunch of other reasons. There are plenty of reasons to run Linux, but I agree that on a mac, for most purposes, OSX beats it hands down.

One thing the original poster should know is that you can run OSX without the gui by logging in as >console at the gui login.

[Big Mac]

You're right, I apologize for the oversimplification. There are many valid reasons for using Linux, but UI isn't one of them; that was the point I was trying to convey.

[utidjian]

Since the OP wants to run PostgreSQL and this system is going to be dedicated server... most of the GUI issues are kinda moot. In my opinion, as far as ease-of-use is concerned Linux may beat out Mac OS X server here. Here's why:

1. PostgreSQL comes standard with most Linux distros, including YDL.
If it isn't installed already all he has to type is:
yum install postgresql
To update:
yum update postgresql
Same goes for all the standard and most third party apps.
See: http://www.yellowdoglinux.com/produc...ware/included/

PostgreSQL does NOT come standard with Mac OS X server. It can be installed though even for an experienced admin the installation and configuration process is a bit daunting, see:
http://developer.apple.com/internet/.../postgres.html

2. For regular administration he can use any of the GUI tools or the CLI (see above links) including ssh terminal sessions or directly, lots of simple GUI config tools, and/or Webmin. Webmin is well supported in Linux for everything.
See: http://www.webmin.com

Mac OS X does not have as comprehensive a set of CLI server admin tools as Linux does. Webmin is also available for Mac OS X but it only has a tiny subset of the full range of functions available for Linux.
Mac OS X has ARD but that requires another Mac (as the client).
For those who are interested Apple has (at last) a decent manual for CLI admin of a server: http://www.apple.com/server/documentation/
Though some of the CLI tools are very clunky compared to the ones available for Linux.

3. Yellow Dog DOES support Linux on the Xserve... presumably as well as Apple supports Mac OS X server on the Xserve. YDL (Terrasoft Solutions) is an "official" Apple Value Added Reseller:
http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com

4. When running a database server... or any server for that matter I, personally, could give damn about how elegant the GUI is. I wouldn't want to forgo a single byte of RAM supporting a GUI and would prefer all resources are devoted to the running of the services.

[NeilCharter]

A good point was made about being able to run Linux and OS X on the same machine (though not at the same time).

I'm not familar with the programs you want to run. Maybe one question that will decide your choice is whether the apps have been compiled to run on OS X.

I would imagine that if anyone can handle working with Linux, that using command line in OS X would be a cinch.

Another thing to consider is X-grid. This reportedly makes clustering very easy. Here's a link:

http://www.apple.com/acg/xgrid/

In my view, OS X offers more flexibility and potential to grow as Apple include more functionality for the high-end user.

Give OS X a test run - I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

[Gavin]

Here's a technical reason to go with OS X.

Linux is newer on the PPC 64 chip than OS X. There may be lots of places where it doesn't quite work right or give you some trouble.

A good example is re-compiling the kernel. I've heard reports of people not getting something as basic as ext3 filesystem support to work when upgrading. It worked when they installed the pre-compiled one but they can't they can' find the trick to make it work when they try it. It's just too new and people haven't figured out the flags and optimizations yet. Rolling your own kernel, which you should do if you want a nice solid server, is tough enough for a novice without it throwing odd errors at you.

My experience with linux is that I always have to fiddle with it. Because it never really knows what hardware it will be used with you have to shrink it to fit: recompile things, hack drivers. OSX is ready to go out of the box, optimized for your hardware.

In the medium term I can see a point where linux actually has more support throughout the system for the 64 bit stuff than OS X. But we're not there yet. Long term apple will beat it because of their intimate knowledge of the hardware.

Another thing to consider is that the PPC is still a bit of a second class citizen in the Linux world. This is not a problem with most of the larger packages you may, install, apache, proftpd, etc, but for instance the mandrake 10.0 distribution is out, but not yet for PPC. It can get annoying if you have to wait 3 months for the ppc port of something you need. This will be rare but sooner or later it will aggravate you but good.

The GUI thing is completely irrelevant. OSX works the same over the command line as any UNIX system. log in over ssh, etc. You can easily hack the start up script so that the GUI never even loads up, just like with Linux.

To sum it up the software differences are non existent. Postgresql, Apache, Postgress, MySQL, PHP, PROftpd, etc., all work on both.

Linux may give you a headache or two while setting it up, depending on how fancy you get with rolling your own.

Day to day maintenance won't be that different. Linux is so customizable that any two boxes will have totally different ways dealing with tasks. Even if you're just using webmin you have to get to know your particular box. Do you upgrade your software with RPM, fink, yum, or do it manually? By the time you add in cron jobs, backup routines, perl scripts that add virtual users, email accounts, and all the other crap that comes with putting together a server, your OS X server will be one unique UNIX box among many. The differences will be not much more than say between linux and freeBSD or even Red Hat and Slackware. Stuff like where exactly did it put the config file. You get the hang of this stuff as you set up your system.

Anyway it won't be hard to dual boot and try them both out.

Do you already own the X serve?
Does it need to be a rack system?
Do you really need that kind of performance; 64 bit, high bandwidth system buses, etc?

I ask because you can put together an X86 system that totally kicks butt as a Linux server for under $800. The difference in cost should easily pay the the 3 extra man days to purchase the parts and set it up.

I would also find the postgresql dev list and ask there.

[Thinine]

If you go with Linux, you loose all of the remote utilities. This includes Server Monitor (temps at every sensor, fan rpm, many others...) and Server Admin (all-in-one control for everything except databasing). These types of things are really what make Mac OS X Server worth using.

[Angus_D]

For certain things you might find Y-HPC useful (since it's fully 64-bit), I guess.

[clarkgoble]

Note however that most unix tools that aren't standard with OSX are quickly installed with Fink. So that's really not a big issue.