Phoronix: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 vs. Its Derivatives
Does Red Hat Enterprise Linux perform any better (or worse) than the various "Enterprise Linux" distributions that are derived from RHEL? Now that Scientific Linux 6.2 was released, here is a performance comparison of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Oracle Linux, CentOS, and Scientific Linux across three different systems.
Paying money for software for the sake of features or speeds is wrong in GPL world.
The code is shared between distribution and it is supposed to be shared, so everyone can profit.
This way we do not have 1000 software pieces that perform in various degrees of the bad.
We have 1000 software pieces that perform most equally good, and fit into 1000 own purposes.
The difference when you pay money is support and development in the direction you consider most important.
Because you can NOT sell code - because it is already written, you can ONLY sell human effort - the job to write the code. This is what you pay for at Red Hat. It can not be measured in software benchmarks, but it could be measured in release/patch speed. And this is why I love Red Hat - they do A LOT for your linux distribution. If you support Red Hat, you support FLOSS.
Also, Oracle is being naughty for holding back oracle software certification on RHEL
What RH really needs to do is buy EnterpriseDB so they can offer an enterprise level, and somewhat oracle workalike, DB solution.
It might be intresting to benchmark the CHAOS distribution https://code.google.com/p/chaos-release/ when released. This is a centos derivate focused on HPC, so it might pull in something intresting about the performance. I looked at the kernel config vs the Scientific Linux one. Few differences so it might be just boring to benchmark this too. One of the notable one is the default I/O scheduler. Deadline is the default in Scientific Linux, CFQ in CHAOS.