Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 vs. Ubuntu 12.04 LTS

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,350

    Default Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 vs. Ubuntu 12.04 LTS

    Phoronix: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 vs. Ubuntu 12.04 LTS

    For some results that are more interesting than the recent RHEL / Oracle / CentOS / Scientific Linux comparison, here are some benchmarks pitting Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 against a development snapshot of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on three different systems.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17103

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    351

    Default differences?

    does anyone have any insight into the performance differences? gcc versions, compiler settings, file systems, kernel differences, what do you think? I am intrigued.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 vs. Ubuntu 12.04 LTS

    For some results that are more interesting than the recent RHEL / Oracle / CentOS / Scientific Linux comparison, here are some benchmarks pitting Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 against a development snapshot of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on three different systems.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17103
    Totally misread the headline, thought it said Redhat Linux 6.2, not that your article wasn't good but it would have been more interesting to see how well old-school stacked up.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    11

    Default

    RHEL6 is mostly based on Fedora 13, which was released in early 2010. Now it's 2012, so you can figure it out quite easily

    RHEL is supposed to be rock solid and not bleeding edge.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistvieh View Post
    RHEL6 is mostly based on Fedora 13, which was released in early 2010. Now it's 2012, so you can figure it out quite easily

    RHEL is supposed to be rock solid and not bleeding edge.
    "LTS" is supposed to be rock solid and not bleeding edge, too!

    I am looking for particular reasons, not vague product descriptions.

    Many of these benchmarks are equivalent and some go to RHEL so apparently newer is not always better.

    Again it is far more complex than you make it seem.

    RHEL 6.2 is very recent so your age argument is bogus, RedHat backports lots of stuff, esp. performance enhancements
    Last edited by frantaylor; 02-29-2012 at 04:29 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frantaylor View Post
    "LTS" is supposed to be rock solid and not bleeding edge, too!
    When did that ever happen? *scnr


    Point is: Red Hat does not bump Software Version throughout the support cycle because of certified software running on it. That means rhel includes software which was released in 2010 and earlier + some security fixes.

    For instance: kernel version is 2.6.32 and not 3.2 or whatever ubuntu will be using. Firefox is 3.6. GCC is 4.4. Even ubuntu lts bumps software versions throughout the release cycle.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Wherever my last post went to...

    Red Hat does not bump software versions throughout the release cycle. There ist certified software for rhel, which relies on this.

    For instance: kernel is 2.6.32, gcc is at 4.4.6 and so on.

    Rad Hat backports security fixes, not features! 6.2 is not very "recent", it has the most recent security fixes! Kernel is still 2.6.32 and that wont change. They sometimes include some drivers from future kernels, but nothing more.
    So: codebase is from 2010.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    107

    Default Post

    You should really not make any more of this comparisons between Red Hat and Ubuntu latest release. First, Red Hat tries to hold the API and ABI for developers and they have to run on something older. Second, you don't want to start a war between Red Hat and Ubuntu cause all the performance Ubuntu has is because of Red Hat developers work...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    France
    Posts
    185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistvieh View Post
    Wherever my last post went to...

    Red Hat does not bump software versions throughout the release cycle. There ist certified software for rhel, which relies on this.

    For instance: kernel is 2.6.32, gcc is at 4.4.6 and so on.

    Rad Hat backports security fixes, not features! 6.2 is not very "recent", it has the most recent security fixes! Kernel is still 2.6.32 and that wont change. They sometimes include some drivers from future kernels, but nothing more.
    So: codebase is from 2010.
    You should read the RHEL 6.1/6.2 release notes. You will see many 2.6.33 to 3.0 kernel features (and drivers) backported.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1

    Default Apache performance difference

    The Apache results sure stand out because of the performance difference (Ubuntu 12.04 running circles around RHEL 6.2). Is this due to different Apache versions, or different default configurations?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •