Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th Jun 2009 20:44 UTC
Between all the updated MacBooks and Snow Leopard news items across the web, you'd almost forget that Apple also has its own server operating system which will also got updated from Leopard to Snow Leopard yesterday. It benefits from the same improvements as the client version, but of course also has a set of its own, server-specific improvements.
Thread beginning with comment 367691
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-07-27
I dunno. It seems to do just fine. Phoronix ran a good comparison between it and Ubuntu 9.04 and OS X did better to much better in many tests. See here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu_jaunt...
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu_jaunt...
most tests don't seem to be related to server duties. but the two database benchmarks are interesting:
sqlite ubuntu 111 sec. vs. osx 25 sec.
postgresql ubuntu 389 transactions/s vs osx 1028 transactions/s
omg! osx totaly powns linux!!!!11eleven!
but as the text points out, the sqlite results are caused by a serious performance regression in the linux kernel used . looking at this results: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_2629_bench...
osx should still be a bit faster, maybe 10-20%.
this kind of benchmark doesn't say much about which os is the faster server os. they can only tell you which version of which server app works well on which os. a meaningful comparison would have to pick a job and use the best combination available on every platform to do this job. for example, mysql seems to a better fit for linux and postgresql a better one for osx.
apple also provides some marketing numbers: http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/performance.html
the file serving seems to get a significant improvement. but it might be telling that apple only shows one comparison with a competitor (even running on very different hardware).
Member since:2009-03-17
As the previous poster pointed out, most of those benchmarks are pretty irrelevant for server duties.
If Apple was serious about the market space, I assume they would have spent more time in adding features like a modern/scalable filesystem, robust failover and recovery, and most importantly... gather some support from big vendors like Oracle, SAP, etc.
Alas, I still think OSX is a fantastic desktop OS. And I assume Apple knows it and wants to focus on that marketplace for the time being.
That being said, for a small workgroup... or media collaboration utility, OSX server is pretty attractive.
Member since:
2006-05-12
I dunno. It seems to do just fine. Phoronix ran a good comparison between it and Ubuntu 9.04 and OS X did better to much better in many tests. See here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu_jaunty_os...
The new iCal2 server, built-in Postfix mail server and the group management makes it a pretty viable small office (< 50 users) server, especially if you have a few Macs in house.
Edited 2009-06-10 05:37 UTC