"Aaron J. Seigo" wrote:
>
> hi..
>
> > What! That makes no sense. A compiled kernel is different from a
> > non-compiled one? Someone compiled it once. He said he didn't make any
> > changes to the FreeBSD kernel except recompile. I will be shocked to
> > hear he sees any difference in a kernel recompile.
> PentiumIII? the former is what you get with the stock redhat kernel, the latter
> is what you get when you compile it yourself...
Fact is, for many things FreeBSD IS faster than Linux. Stock RedHat or
not. As to the RedHat kernels, as of RedHat 6.1 you get an optimized
kernel -- that is, optimized for whatever processor you are using, i386,
i586, or i686.
However, just like on many things MySQL is faster than PostgreSQL, speed
is not everything. For use with a multithreaded webserver (AOLserver),
for instance, FreeBSD sucks mud (and I'm talking stbility, not speed),
while Linux works fairly well (Solaris shines for this application,
BTW). Likewise, currently Linux is better supported than the BSD's --
for the moment, that is.
And I have nothing against the BSD's -- after all, Linuxites owe the BSD
crowd as much as they owe the GNU crowd. I ran a BSD system for awhile
(on ancient 68030 hardware) -- and it worked well. I also ran a System
V Release 2 system for awhile -- it also worked well. Linux meets my
current needs -- and is amply fast for the uses to which I put it.
If I need extreme security, I'll go with OpenBSD. If I need extreme
network load capability, I'll go with FreeBSD. I am not religiously
tied to any OS -- that's the true benefit of multiple open-source OS's
(and RDBMS's!) -- I have a choice.
And when the day is ended, I still like my RedHat Linux server running
my RPM's of PostgreSQL 6.5.2. And it likes me.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
************
