what Linux to run

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:57 AM, <mgould@isstrucksoftware.net> wrote:

Our application runs on Windows, however we have been told that we can
pick any OS to run our server on. I'm thinking Linux because from
everything I've read, it appears to be a better on performance and there
are other features like tablespaces which we could take advantage of.
On our hosted solution, the application runs in a Software as a Service
model and being able to keep each companies tables in their own table
space would be nice. Additionally it appears that there are a lot more
ways to tune the engine if we need to than under windows, plus the
capability to hold more connections.

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres
on. This machine would be dedicated to the database only.

I'd like a recommendation for both a GUI hosted version and a non-GUI
version. I haven't used Linux in the past but did spend several year s
in a mixed Unix and IBM mainframe environment at the console level.

Best Regards,

Michael Gould
Intermodal Software Solutions, LLC
904-226-0978

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

If you're going to use it for anything important, go with a
mainstream distribution with commercial support available.
RedHat, CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu are the most popular choices, its going to
be easier to get system admins and chances are good that if you have a
problem, someone else has had it and solved it before.

-Adam

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, mgould@isstrucksoftware.net wrote:

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres on.
This machine would be dedicated to the database only.

Michael,

There is no 'preferred' linux distribution; the flame wars on this topic
died out a decade or so ago.

From what you write, I would suggest that you look at one of the Ubunutus
<http://www.ubuntu.org/&gt;. Either the KDE or Gnome versions will appear
Microsoft-like; the Xfce version appears more like CDE. Download a bootable
.iso (a.k.a. 'live disk) and burn it to a cdrom and you can try it without
.installing it. If you do like it, install it from the same disk.

The Ubuntus boot directly into the GUI and that tends to be more
comfortable for newly defenestrated users. If you like that, but want the
more open and readily-available equivalent, install Debian. The ubuntus are
derivatives of debian.

We use Slackware here, but that's not as easy a transition as are the
ubuntus.

Regardless of what distribution you select, there's a learning curve and a
ton of help on mail lists and Web-based fora. The F/OSS community has always
been excepionally helpful to everyone.

Good decision. Now make it happen. :-)

Rich

On Feb 28, 2012, at 9:16 AM, Adam Cornett wrote:

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:57 AM, <mgould@isstrucksoftware.net> wrote:
Our application runs on Windows, however we have been told that we can
pick any OS to run our server on. I'm thinking Linux because from
everything I've read, it appears to be a better on performance and there
are other features like tablespaces which we could take advantage of.
On our hosted solution, the application runs in a Software as a Service
model and being able to keep each companies tables in their own table
space would be nice. Additionally it appears that there are a lot more
ways to tune the engine if we need to than under windows, plus the
capability to hold more connections.

Sounds like a good choice.

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres
on. This machine would be dedicated to the database only.

There isn't really a preferred distro in technical terms - all the major
distros are fine. Where they differ is available support, stability and
support lifespan.

For production a good bet is probably RHEL if you have money to
spend. Other good options include CentOS (RHEL knock-off without
the Redhat infrastructure), Debian and maybe Ubuntu LTS[1]I love Ubuntu and use it on many of my servers, but it's a bit too far towards the cutting-edge end of the stable-to-bleeding-edge spectrum.. Anything
that has decent support available (both peer and paid) will be fine.

Ununtu is a little friendlier to beginners, and RHEL a little more unfriendly,
but there's not that much in it.

I'd like a recommendation for both a GUI hosted version and a non-GUI
version. I haven't used Linux in the past but did spend several year s
in a mixed Unix and IBM mainframe environment at the console level.

They all provide a fairly similar command line environment and all
offer several GUI environments.

Cheers,
Steve

[1]: I love Ubuntu and use it on many of my servers, but it's a bit too far towards the cutting-edge end of the stable-to-bleeding-edge spectrum.
towards the cutting-edge end of the stable-to-bleeding-edge spectrum.

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres
on. This machine would be dedicated to the database only.=20

I'd like a recommendation for both a GUI hosted version and a non-GUI
version. I haven't used Linux in the past but did spend several year s
in a mixed Unix and IBM mainframe environment at the console level.
=20

Hi,

one thing you might want to consider is system lifetime: some distro may be set up so that you
more or less have to reinstall within 2 years, if you plan to use update service - others may be
longer.
Now, fast development is great AND allows you to change to better hardware easily.
It does however mean that you might get surprised with a different postgres version at times
you dont really like it.
If you plan to install from source, this would not be of any concern

regards
Wolfgang Hamann

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, hamann.w@t-online.de wrote:

one thing you might want to consider is system lifetime: some distro may
be set up so that you more or less have to reinstall within 2 years, if
you plan to use update service - others may be longer. Now, fast
development is great AND allows you to change to better hardware easily.
It does however mean that you might get surprised with a different
postgres version at times you dont really like it. If you plan to install
from source, this would not be of any concern

Wolfgang,

Most updates fix security vulnerabilities. If you keep current with those
there's not a compelling need to upgrade the distribution itself unless you
want to do so. There's a distinction between the distribution itself
(kernel, and GNU tools) and the end-user applications bundled with the
distribution. Also, the distributions with which I'm familiar allow you to
select the applications to upgrade so you can avoid surprises.

Rich

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, hamann.w@t-online.de wrote:

one thing you might want to consider is system lifetime: some distro may
be set up so that you more or less have to reinstall within 2 years, if
you plan to use update service - others may be longer. Now, fast
development is great AND allows you to change to better hardware easily.
It does however mean that you might get surprised with a different
postgres version at times you dont really like it. If you plan to install
from source, this would not be of any concern

Wolfgang,

Most updates fix security vulnerabilities. If you keep current with those
there's not a compelling need to upgrade the distribution itself unless you
want to do so. There's a distinction between the distribution itself
(kernel, and GNU tools) and the end-user applications bundled with the
distribution. Also, the distributions with which I'm familiar allow you to
select the applications to upgrade so you can avoid surprises.

Hi Rich,

if - after say 18 months, I do no longer get updates (this seems to be lifecycle of
the locally popular SuSE), it means that you either have to do an upgrade install
or forget about security fixes. Now the upgrade install might bring you some software
with incompatible changes, or even might replace some software you used to rely on
with something different
After some unpleasant surprises I stopped to upgrade: rather get a fresh box, install
everything there, and once it plays nicely, swap them

Regards
Wolfgang

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Rich Shepard <rshepard@appl-ecosys.com> wrote:

 The Ubuntus boot directly into the GUI and that tends to be more
comfortable for newly defenestrated users. If you like that, but want the
more open and readily-available equivalent, install Debian. The ubuntus are
derivatives of debian.

Note that Ubuntu also comes in a GUI free server edition as well. I
can definitely state that Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Server edition is rock
solid stable for the hardware I've run it on (48 core AMD and 40 core
Intel machines with LSI, Arecam and 3Ware cards)

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:

Note that Ubuntu also comes in a GUI free server edition as well.  I
can definitely state that Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Server edition is rock
solid stable for the hardware I've run it on (48 core AMD and 40 core
Intel machines with LSI, Arecam and 3Ware cards)

Ubuntu 9.10 isn't LTS, but it's served me just fine. I have a server
that's not been rebooted since July 2010 (including a database-using
application process that has been running since boot, and is in
constant use), and I don't feel like bringing it down to bring it up
to date! Really, any of the main-stream Linuxes should be fine.

Chris Angelico

Note that Ubuntu also comes in a GUI free server edition as well. I can
definitely state that Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Server edition is rock solid stable

+1

I've been running 10.04 LTS Server for over three years (on a Dell PowerEdge
2850) using Martin Pitt's PostgreSQL 9.1 PPA.

--
Gary Chambers

Thanks to all

Sent from Samsung mobile

Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:

I've been running 10.04 LTS Server for over three years (on a Dell PowerEdge
2850) using Martin Pitt's PostgreSQL 9.1 PPA.

I apologize. That's over two years.

--
G.

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Gary Chambers <gwchamb@gwcmail.com> wrote:

I've been running 10.04 LTS Server for over three years (on a Dell
PowerEdge
2850) using Martin Pitt's PostgreSQL 9.1 PPA.

I apologize.  That's over two years.

Darnit! I was hoping to borrow your time machine too. :)

Le mercredi 29 fￜvrier 2012 ￜ 11:31 -0500, Gary Chambers a ￜcrit :

Note that Ubuntu also comes in a GUI free server edition as well. I can
definitely state that Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Server edition is rock solid stable

+1

I've been running 10.04 LTS Server for over three years (on a Dell PowerEdge
2850) using Martin Pitt's PostgreSQL 9.1 PPA.

Hi,

I find that using the Dedian distribution (which Ubuntu is based on)
makes the process of building a server very simple and reliable. Below
are the notes I took for the last one; you'll have most steps outlined;
it uses a LAMP stack made of Linux+Apache+Mod_Perl+Postgresql.

The one I built before this one was up for 550 days, serving 5 users
full time. The machine is the cheapest server at online.net (dedibox, 15
ￜ/month)), it serves 100 requests/seconds, session validation included.
I only took it down because it required a bios update.

#
#Install Notes
#

Debian V6.0.0 (64BITS)
Date 2012 01 26

#installation initiale avec sda1,2 et 3 seulement
apt-get install parted
#aprï¿œs installation, crï¿œation des partitions logiques 5,6,7
#et remount de /var, /home, /var/log dessus

#
#ssh
#

#edit /etc/ssh/sshd_config
# Authentication:
LoginGraceTime 60
PermitRootLogin no
StrictModes yes
#pas plus de quatre essais (message dans les logs ￜ partir de la
troisiï¿œme erreur)
MaxAuthTries 4
AllowUsers XXXXX

#edit .ssh/config on workstation

#ssh displays funky characters
dpkg-reconfigure locales
207. fr_FR ISO-8859-1
208. fr_FR.UTF-8 UTF-8
209. fr_FR@euro ISO-8859-15

default : fr_FR@euro

#dï¿œsactiver les programmes lancï¿œs par dï¿œfaut et non utilisï¿œs
update-rc.d -f bind9 remove
update-rc.d -f mdadm remove
update-rc.d -f portmap remove

#run
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade

#utilities
apt-get install gcc rsync sqlite3 make
apt-get install git

#
#Postgresql
#
apt-get install postgresql postgresql-client postgresql-plperl-8.4

createuser -d XXXXX

#pg_dumpall && pg_restore cluster from workstation

#
#Apache
#
apt-get install apache2-mpm-worker libapache2-request-perl
libapache2-mod-perl2 libapache2-mod-apreq2 apache2.2-common

#configure logrotate : edit /etc/logrotate.d/apache2

#enable apache2 modules
a2enmod ssl rewrite apreq

#
#install perl modules
#

#pre-compiled binaries for DBI & DBD::Pg & sqlite3
apt-get install libapache-dbi-perl libdbd-pg-perl libdbd-sqlite3-perl

Done.

--
Vincent Veyron
http://marica.fr/
Logiciel de gestion des sinistres et des contentieux pour le service juridique

On 28/02/2012 18:17, Rich Shepard wrote:

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, mgould@isstrucksoftware.net wrote:

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres
on. This machine would be dedicated to the database only.

Michael,

There is no 'preferred' linux distribution; the flame wars on this topic
died out a decade or so ago.

From what you write, I would suggest that you look at one of the Ubunutus
<http://www.ubuntu.org/&gt;. Either the KDE or Gnome versions will appear
Microsoft-like; the Xfce version appears more like CDE. Download a bootable
.iso (a.k.a. 'live disk) and burn it to a cdrom and you can try it without
.installing it. If you do like it, install it from the same disk.

The Ubuntus boot directly into the GUI and that tends to be more
comfortable for newly defenestrated users. If you like that, but want the
more open and readily-available equivalent, install Debian. The ubuntus are
derivatives of debian.

One interesting thing I've discovered recently is that there is a HUGE
difference in performance between CentOS 6.0 and Ubuntu Server 10.04
(LTS) in at least the memory allocator and possibly also multithreading
libraries (in favour of CentOS). PostgreSQL shouldn't be particularly
sensitive to either of these, but it makes me wonder what else is
suboptimal in Ubuntu.

On 28/02/2012 17:57, mgould@isstrucksoftware.net wrote:

Our application runs on Windows, however we have been told that we can
pick any OS to run our server on. I'm thinking Linux because from
everything I've read, it appears to be a better on performance and there
are other features like tablespaces which we could take advantage of.
On our hosted solution, the application runs in a Software as a Service
model and being able to keep each companies tables in their own table
space would be nice. Additionally it appears that there are a lot more
ways to tune the engine if we need to than under windows, plus the
capability to hold more connections.

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres
on. This machine would be dedicated to the database only.

I'd like a recommendation for both a GUI hosted version and a non-GUI
version. I haven't used Linux in the past but did spend several year s
in a mixed Unix and IBM mainframe environment at the console level.

Hi,

PostgreSQL administration would not benefit much from a GUI, as it is
basically centered around editing and tuning configuration files (either
its or the OS's).

For Linux, if you want stability and decent performance, you should
probably choose either CentOS, or if you want commercial support, Red
Hat Enterprise Linux (which is basically the same thing, only commercial).

Personally, I'd recommend FreeBSD (it's not a Linux, it's more
Unix-like) but I'm probably biased ;)

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> wrote:

One interesting thing I've discovered recently is that there is a HUGE
difference in performance between CentOS 6.0 and Ubuntu Server 10.04
(LTS) in at least the memory allocator and possibly also multithreading
libraries (in favour of CentOS). PostgreSQL shouldn't be particularly
sensitive to either of these, but it makes me wonder what else is
suboptimal in Ubuntu.

To be fair, RHEL6 was released 7 months after Ubuntu 10.04. But
Redhat is pretty good at kernel patching for optimizations ertc. I'd
be more interested in comparisons with ubuntu 12.04, due out next
month.

Ivan Voras wrote:

On 28/02/2012 17:57, mgould@isstrucksoftware.net wrote:

Our application runs on Windows, however we have been told that we can
pick any OS to run our server on. I'm thinking Linux because from
everything I've read, it appears to be a better on performance and there
are other features like tablespaces which we could take advantage of.
On our hosted solution, the application runs in a Software as a Service
model and being able to keep each companies tables in their own table
space would be nice. Additionally it appears that there are a lot more
ways to tune the engine if we need to than under windows, plus the
capability to hold more connections.

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres
on. This machine would be dedicated to the database only.

I'd like a recommendation for both a GUI hosted version and a non-GUI
version. I haven't used Linux in the past but did spend several year s
in a mixed Unix and IBM mainframe environment at the console level.

Hi,

PostgreSQL administration would not benefit much from a GUI, as it is
basically centered around editing and tuning configuration files (either
its or the OS's).

For Linux, if you want stability and decent performance, you should
probably choose either CentOS, or if you want commercial support, Red
Hat Enterprise Linux (which is basically the same thing, only commercial).

Personally, I'd recommend FreeBSD (it's not a Linux, it's more
Unix-like) but I'm probably biased ;)

+1 from me.

http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/kernel/2011-11/msg00017.html

Nice numbers with a choice, BSD excel not in numbers but in stability
surviving all tests.

--
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.

On 02/03/12 01:25, Ivan Voras wrote:

On 28/02/2012 18:17, Rich Shepard wrote:

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, mgould@isstrucksoftware.net wrote:

If we move to Linux, what is the preferred Linux for running Postgres
on. This machine would be dedicated to the database only.

Michael,

There is no 'preferred' linux distribution; the flame wars on this topic
died out a decade or so ago.

From what you write, I would suggest that you look at one of the Ubunutus
<http://www.ubuntu.org/&gt;. Either the KDE or Gnome versions will appear
Microsoft-like; the Xfce version appears more like CDE. Download a bootable
.iso (a.k.a. 'live disk) and burn it to a cdrom and you can try it without
.installing it. If you do like it, install it from the same disk.

The Ubuntus boot directly into the GUI and that tends to be more
comfortable for newly defenestrated users. If you like that, but want the
more open and readily-available equivalent, install Debian. The ubuntus are
derivatives of debian.

One interesting thing I've discovered recently is that there is a HUGE
difference in performance between CentOS 6.0 and Ubuntu Server 10.04
(LTS) in at least the memory allocator and possibly also multithreading
libraries (in favour of CentOS). PostgreSQL shouldn't be particularly
sensitive to either of these, but it makes me wonder what else is
suboptimal in Ubuntu.

I think if you are going to select a member of the Debian family, I
would strongly recommend Debian itself. I have the impression that the
Debian community is more serious about quality than Canonical (the
company behind Ubuntu).

Given a choice between RHEL, Centos, and Ubuntu. I would recommend
either of RHE or, Centos - the former if you have the budget for the
support & piece of mind. Red Hat has won awards for its quality of User
Service - and Red Hat contributes vastly more effort towards maintaining
the Linux kernel than Canonical.

In a about a year I will be setting up a server for a JBoss/PostgreSQL
based application. Currently I'm thinking of using either Centos (RHEL
if we get sufficient budget) or Debian, but I will defer the actual
decision to nearer the time. I use Fedora for my development box, and my
current test server runs Ubuntu (not my choice, but I see no significant
reasons for changing it at the moment, though I'm tempted).

Cheers,
Gavin

Lørdag 3. mars 2012 01.43.29 skrev Gavin Flower :

I think if you are going to select a member of the Debian family, I
would strongly recommend Debian itself. I have the impression that the
Debian community is more serious about quality than Canonical (the
company behind Ubuntu).

I haven't run Debian for ten years, when I had a headless old PC running with
a LAMP stack. Since I discovered Gentoo, that has been my preferred distro.
However, I'm currently in the process of setting up a dedicated Web server
with Debian as it may one day be another person's responsibility to admin this
box, and I would consider it cruel to leave a Gentoo box to anyone but the
most devoted Linux fans.

My current gripe is this: The «stable» version of Postgres on Debian is 8.4.
In order to install 9.1, I added this line to /etc/apt/sources.list:

deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free

Then I did an apt-get update and

apt-get install postgresql-9.1 postgresql-client-9.1

Finally I commented out the added line of /etc/apt/sources.list.

This seems a rather roundabout way, is there a better one?

regards, Leif