Re: Re: Red Hat to support PostgreSQL

> > 1) Distribution of Linux to have the largest number of "out of the box"
> > security holes. Check back and look at the security reports. Count them if
> > you insist.
>
> And check for the number of them being Red Hat specific.

I have. Maybe you need a refresher? ;)

> >
> > 2) Most commercial software made _for_ RedHat (some companies only
> > "support" RedHat) insist that you use RPM to install their software,
> > otherwise you are SOL. Most commercial software made _for_ _Linux_
> > supports all distributions.
>
> That depends very much on the level of support you're giving - for a
> big, complex you want to support as few environments as possible. You
> can use it other places, but won't be supported to the same degree.
>
> > 3) So much extra crap running to begin with, eating up extra memory, cpu,
> > etc.
>
> You're obviously unfamiliar with it.

Obviously.

Considering I've been using RedHat (still do in non-production
environments) since it came out, and Linux since the beginning of 1993,
I'm certainly very familiar with it. If you are telling me that a default
install does _not_ have a bunch of needless things running for production
environments, you're probably the one not experienced running enterprise
level servers in a production environment with RedHat. Just because you
work there doesn't make you an expert. In the field, we tend to have more
experience than the guy who sits behind the desk writing drivers, or
answering phone calls in a NOC.

> > I'm sure we could go on, but this isn't a Linux list :)
>
> Agreed. And of course, it isn't very interesting to discuss with
> someone who is unfamiliar with the product.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I can understand your approach though,
considering the big bad wolf just came in and tore apart your sweet little
daughter.

-Knight