We are looking for a open source UNIX OS for implementation in our datacenter. Services such as DNS, FTP, SMTP, IMAP, HTTP would be run.

The obvious choices are FreeBSD and openSolaris. According to benchmarks and the size of communities, openSolaris is clearly ahead. So, which one would be the better choice? Or should I go for Solaris 10?

The most low-end servers in our datacenter are running on Intel Xeon with at least 2GB of RAM.

My experience with solaris is slow-laris, may be thats just me and the fact that i run in on x86 not some monstor sun box.

Both would be perfect for that and Solaris is better on bigger iron. If you have more than one CPU or core, go for Solaris.

Solaris is slower on single-core/single-cpu boxes, so if you only have one CPU/one core, regardless of the speed, go for freebsd.

I use Solaris 10 as a workstation (AMD64) and FreeBSD as my ftp/nfs/smb server, on an old AMD Athlon. Before you go for OpenSolaris, make sure that the kit works well with it, if at all possible, get the hw from Sun.

I like Solaris for SMF, it is really coool and years ahead of anything similar I have seen! And last but not least, ZFS!!!!

PS: I do not and have never worked for Sun ;-).

OpenSolaris is on PAR with FreeBSD's performance:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...way_2008&num=1

Noth are good server OSes, on FreeBSD you would have great advantage of FreeBSD Ports, something that OpenSolaris will not have for longer time, current IPS repositories are a joke at most, if you add a blastwave repository to it, it starts to make sense.

On OpenSolaris you would have to learn SMF services management, very diffrent from standart /path/to/script start|stop|restart, especially when you have to write XML configuration for them, IMHO for services you mentioned FreeBSD would be better idea, while OpenSolaris would be better idea for virtualization other then OS level (FreeBSD Jails/OpenSolaris Containers/Zones) so for VirtualBox or Xen you would need OpenSolaris ... or NetBSD.

Check this for adding blastwave repository or short SMF intro:
http://blogs.sun.com/observatory/

I agree with most of what vermaden claims ...

However:

You don't have to create XML configurations for SMF ... thanks to inetconv. But stopping/restarting/status query is done differently, true. It is really so cool, that it is worth learning it!

Performance is better on Solaris, even the linked page states it ;-), but they do come close .... I guess a lot has happened in FreeBSD 7 ... I have used versions 4.2, 5 and 6 (6 very shortly, to be honest) ...

As for ports, there are certainly more for FreeBSD ... but the most useful ones I always use are also on sunfreeware ;-)

taste ...

I also assume FreeBSD has more hardware drivers than Solaris, but I am not so sure about that. So it might also depend on the hardware you plan to get or where you get it ...

To the_gripmaster:
What OpenSolaris distribution are you targeting ? (OpenSolaris 2008.11, SolarisExpress, other ?)
Do you need commercial support ?

- - - -

I'm surprised about vermaden comments about SMF. SMF is a big improvement compared to the previous System rc script system and it is also, in my opinion, easier to learn and use.

Unless you develop your own services, there is no need to create XML files, and even that is not that complicate. For the casual administrator, there are just three commands to manage the whole thing (svcadm, svcs and inetadm). Services are restarted automatically, service dependency is handled gracefully.

OpenSolaris 2008.11

No commercial support is necessary.

If no formal support is needed, you do not need Solaris 10. OpenSolaris 2008.11 (which can be supported by the way) has some really cool unique features like the Nautilus time slider.

Other ones like Dtrace, Zones, ZFS (including ZFS boot), SMF (already discussed) can make the difference.

Disclaimer: I have not that much recent experience with FreeBSD while I have a lot with Solaris so my advice is probably biased. Moreover, unlike the linux kernel and its GPL constraints, BSDs ones can pick code from OpenSolaris (and vice versa) so both OSes can cross-pollinate to improve each other.

As jlliagre stated, SMF is pretty easy to learn for a novice and it can really ease your life. It certainly had been an ease for me, and I confess that XML makes more "nervous" than shell scripting, usually. When it came to writing my own service manifests (I had to do that plenty of times) I took inspiration from the SMF manifests that come with Solaris itself. Opensolaris.org, also, hosts a page dedicated to them which has been very useful to me in the past. The link should be this but the page seems to be down at the moment: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/smf/manifests/

To thecarpy: I don't think that inetconv is the swiss army knife for producing manifests. As far as I know, it's an utility which may help you transitioning classical inet-based services to SMF, but not every service (I would add only the smallest part) is inet based.

To vermaden: I mostly agree with you but I don't agree with your opinion about SMF. Moreover, the services that the poster wants to run on Solaris are good candidates for SMF in my opinion while you seem to state the contrary. It may be taste, but some of them are running on SMF out of the box.

As somebody already suggested, these services are already in SMF: DNS, FTP, SMTP, IMAP, HTTP

So SMF only has advantages for our friend ....

To crisostomo_enrico: true, but it can help you understand what is happening and how to create more. I might have taken that a bit too far ;-).

PS: I am really happy that this topic has not had any fanboys flaming. ;-)

Did I said something wrong about SMF?

Its just other concept of handlig services (some services in solaris still use old RC scripts, is it so hard to rewrite them to SMF?), nice that SMF also makes sure that the service is really running, but writing XML configs without any generator is at least pain in th ass and not so much KISS way.

DTrace, ZFS and Zones (FreeBSD Jails) are part of FreeBSD also.

Dtrace in 8-CURRENT, ZFS version 11? in 8-CURRENT, 7-STABLE and 7-RC1 if I recall correctly and FreeBSD Jails from FreeBSD 4.x propably

What I said about SMF that you do not agree

SMF is ok, its just other concept for management, XML is not that big obstacle, but developers could use something more friendly here instead. I compare it to FreeBSD's RC scripts which are very good sollution with diversion into base system scripts (/etc/rc.d) and third party packages/ports (/usr/local/etc/rc.d), generaly this diversity is seen everywhere in FreeBSD system and allows easy cut packages from base system.

Scripts in runlevels (rc2.d ... ) with symlinks to /etc/init.d are pure mess of course, both FreeBSD's RC* and SMF are superior to this.

*They went into FreeBSD from NetBSD.

Hi Vermaden.

I was referring to the feeling I had reading your comment and, in fact, you sort of confirm that when you say:
By the way, I agree that writing XML files at first seems an overhead and I feel more comfortable with shell scripts too. But after writing the first you discover it's not that hard and SMF advantages are worth writing some XMLs. Just that.

Bye,
Enrico

Here is obligatory reading about OpenSolaris as a server:
http://elektronkind.org/2008/07/open...008-11-storage

I think he had other posts as well about Solaris and server. Maybe look around a bit.




Here is obligatory reading before contemplating using ZFS
http://www.acmqueue.org/modules.php?...owpage&pid=504
A MUST read.