Oracle's Infrastructure Now Fully Linux-ized

mbadolato writes "An article over at InformationWeek reports Oracle is aggressively adopting Linux both internally and for its products, despite SCO Group's threats earlier this week that it may sue those who don't pay licensing fees to the company. Chuck Rozwat, an Oracle executive VP, says the company has moved its IT infrastructure to Linux, a year after CEO Larry Ellis issued the mandate. In the coming year, Oracle will move its base development platform to Linux, including putting the open-source operating system on the workstations of 8,000 developers"

Comments

Ellis?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when did Larry Ellison drop the last two letters of his last name? Come on, editors...

Re:Ellis?

[The Old Burke]

I don't know about why the n is missing, but SCO has the exclusive right to use the o in their name.

Re:Ellis?

[kubrick]

Yeah, don't challenge The Ego... he could have /. tied up in court for *years* over this. :)

Re:Ellis?

[Anonymous Coward]

Larry Ellis

Track and field coach for the U.S. men's team at the 1984 Olympics and past president of USA Track & Field; coached 1968 Olympic long jump champion Bob Beamon; spent 13 years coaching at Jamaica HS in Queens, N.Y. and 22 years at Princeton; NCAA All-American runner at New York University; elected USTAF president in 1992 and held the position until 1996.

Re:Ellis?

[mcpkaaos]

That's odd. I always just assumed that it was a zero. I think I'll continue with that assumption. :)

Re:Ellis?

[Gherald]

That's Odd. I always just assumed that it was a zerO. I think I'll cOntinue with that assumptiOn. :)

Y0u n0w 0we them 4x $699 = $2769

Re:Ellis?

[mcpkaaos]

Oops.

Re:Ellis?

[mickwd]

That's nothing.........

He used to be called HilLarry (at weekends).

;)

Hey SCO!

[Dukeofshadows]

As long as they're suing everyone who dares use "their" Unix code, who wants to bet that Oracle is the next one they sue?

Re:Hey SCO!

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe someone dared SCO to see how many 1000-pound gorillas it could poke before one reached out and crushed them.

Re:Hey SCO!

[hedley]

I am sure they got one of the 1500 letters sent out. Them and nVidia are two very big linux shops in the CA Bay Area. nVidia in particular has video of their data centre touting how many 1000's of SMP machines they have.

I am sure SCO hears the dinner bell. Too bad all they are going to eat is the ashes of their stock certificates.

Re:Hey SCO!

[fussman]

Hey SCO! I caught M$ using your code! Crush them!

Re:Hey SCO!

[BlackListedCard]

I am sure SCO hears the dinner bell. Thats funny..... I had a good laugh...

Re:Hey SCO!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who wants to bet that Oracle is the next who (rightfully) doesn't care?

Re:Hey SCO!

[tommck]

Way to go out on a limb with your prediction, Nostradamus!

3 Weeks ago

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you see all the stories about it? By dropping the "on", he saves nearly 20% on his first and last name. Originally, he was going to drop the "ry" on Larry, but "Lar" just sounded stupid.

Re:3 Weeks ago

[smittyoneeach]

Thinking about what he'd like to do in Redmond just brings out the American Psycho in him...

Nice

[TheQuantumShift]

A big giant company, openly using linux even with sco's perfectly logical (from a corporate america standpoint) litigation. A big giant company that other big giant companies buy from. This is what I like to see. And by the time I finish this post it will nolonger be first. I'll be lucky to break the top 50 by the end of this sentence...

Re:Nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, looks like you broke the top 50.

Any Linux user is a good user...

Re:Nice

[heinousjay]

This is a big giant company led by an insane man with aspirations to make the brain look like pinky. Why would he worry about Darling Darl and the SCOrchestra?

Re:Nice

[dhawton]

I'm glad Oracle made this decision. It might lead other companies to follow suit and defy those SCO executives and their bull. Wonder when SCO will be in defensive mode instead of offensive.

Re:Nice

[Anonymous Coward]

"A big giant company, openly using linux even with sco's perfectly logical (from a corporate america standpoint) litigation. "

If it was logical from a corporate american standpoint? The Oracle and others wouldn't be doing what they're doing. However since they are, it appears that there's nothing logical about SCO's actions from any standpoint.

Re:Nice

[pmz]

A big giant company, openly using linux even with sco's perfectly logical (from a corporate america standpoint) litigation.

Can enough big giant companies (IBM, Oracle, Sun, HP, etc.) adopt Linux to the point that all of SCO's legal claims are nullified? What happens if everyone is using Linux, SCO cries about it, and everyone just says "tough noogies!"

I know this sort of thing works in trademark-land (e.g., Kleenex), but it would be interesting if the people at large can also usurp other types of "intellectual property".

Re:Nice

[TheQuantumShift]

To OSS advocates like us, there is no logic. But to corporate america, any chance of getting involved in legal action is highly questionable. Guaranteed, SCO's claims are making some companies think twice, thrice, and whatever comes after that... What's nice is that a few big reputable companies (Oracle, I've heard of them...), are calling the bluff.

SCO is no real threat

[The No Vlad Zone]

This move should prove to everyone that SCO's claims are complete BS. If a company with the resources like Oracle isn't bothered by their threats then we can assume that their lawyers told them that SCO's claims are baseless. Oracle's products are the mainstay of the database industry and moving to Linux shows that Microsoft does not in fact have a monopoly. If more Linux desktops are deployed Microsoft will become just another software company competing with all the others.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[Feyr]

actually no, read the article it says "..a year after...", back one year there was no big fuss over all these licensing fees issues

but you can bet that sco will get brutally ass-raped if they even try to touch mr ellison's jewels. he's got a big enough ego to go mad about it, and the cash to sue sco into oblivion

Re:SCO is no real threat

[buffer-overflowed]

Maybe they're taking a calculated risk. They could strongly suspect the claims are baseless, and even if they aren't it's not going to be resolved for a good 2-5 years.

When it is resolved, if SCO does win(and survives bleeding cash from legal fees), the infringing code will be removed and they're fine anyway. If the infringing code can't be removed [unlikely], then they're banking on Linux being a serious competitor around then anyway and worth the liscensing fees circa 2007.

I'd say it's a pretty safe bet.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[Anonymous Coward]

" If more Linux desktops are deployed "

Maybe in the corporate world where a sys admin can handle everything, but not when linux requires ME to be a sysadmin to run it at home.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[rmohr02]

Oracle is a big company, but I feel more comfortable that a company like IBM backing up GNU/Linux.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[tshak]

If a company with the resources like Oracle isn't bothered by their threats then we can assume that their lawyers told them that SCO's claims are baseless.

No, it's because they have those resources to pay the licensing fees should the need arise.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[Anonymous Coward]

That's ok, we can just make a distro for you that leaves you wide open to security holes and such, because you don't understand your computer.

We could call it "Dumbfuck Linux", or maybe even "Windows XP".

Re:SCO is no real threat

[pong]

IMHO, there is one flaw in your analysis. Customer perception is very important so if Oracle expect the SCO law suit to hang around and get news coverage for a few years they sure as hell would not bet their money on linux.

Why is it that SCO show 80 lines of linux kernel source code that are identical to SCO Unix source code and keep claiming that there are hundreds of identical files. Files - not lines.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[mec]

Monday: Red Hat sues SCO.
Thursday: IBM sues SCO.
Friday: Oracle announces commitment to Linux.

This is a good way to do PR: a rolling wave from different sources.

Objectively, it's the same total amount of commitment to Linux whether everybody does it in one day or they do it three weeks apart. But this timing feeds the news cycle better.

I'm hoping that Google will issue a press release soon. And then a behemoth retailer, like Home Depot. And then a brokerage firm, like Merrill Lynch.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[Anonymous Coward]

Then the SEC :-)

Re:SCO is no real threat

[minus9]

"They could strongly suspect the claims are baseless, and even if they aren't it's not going to be resolved for a good 2-5 years."

That's assuming that SCO will still be around 2-5 years from now.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm working at the company in question (as another poster liked to put it). You think Larry thought this up last weekend and decided to make the new public? Guy, this has been in plans (and implementation, mind you) well before SCO came up with their "All Your Base." Big decisions like these aren't made in a day, and just because of what SCO is doing, a company like Oracle doesn't backoff.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[Gordonjcp]

Do you put petrol in your car by yourself, or do you pay someone to come over, take the car away, and bring it back filled up? Do you empty the kitchen bin when its full by yourself, or do you have to get a grown-up to do it? Do you wipe your own arse?

How difficult do you think it is to look after a computer?

Re:SCO is no real threat

[pmz]

Oracle's products are the mainstay of the database industry and moving to Linux shows that Microsoft does not in fact have a monopoly.

Only in the context of database servers. Microsoft does have a monopoly on the desktop regarding office productivity software and gaming. Only recently, have Linux, the BSDs, OpenOffice.org, Mozilla, etc. begun to get enough mind-share such that Microsoft's desktop monopoly is jepardized. Note that Microsoft's monopoly is so entrenched that only FREE products could compete.

It is annoying when people look at the whole software industry as one market, when it is really thousands upon thousands of markets. Each category of software application (operating system, database, word processor, strategy game, action game, calendars, etc.) is a whole market distinct from all others.

Look at the automotive industry, for example. Sure, there is a market for whole cars, but each car is made up of thousands of components. If you look around, there are distinct markets for each component. Want a snazzier tachometer? There are several companies eager and willing to sell you one. Note that even the market for whole cars can be broken down into heavy-duty trucks, light-duty trucks, vans, family sedans, sports cars, wannabe sports cars, compacts, etc.

There is nothing special about software that frees it from traditional and long-worn concepts in the business world. Of course, there will always be the issues of "is it art" vs. "is it a truck", but those are mostly due to the diversity and immaturity of the software industry.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[pmz]

No, it's because they have those resources to pay the licensing fees should the need arise.

8000+ machines X $1,399 (future SCO price) >= $11,192,000.

Well, for a company the size of Oracle, $20 million or so in expenses really isn't that big of a deal. So, what Oracle is doing is actually a really smart gamble. If SCO gets flushed, Oracle pays nothing. If SCO wins the lottery (their odds of success, BTW), Oracle is out $20 million, but they could probably negotiate a better price with SCO. Their attitude is probably "We really don't have anything to lose."

My favorite scenario is that Oracle (or IBM) simply buys SCO. The costs of buying SCO vs. the costs of paying SCO for thousands of Linux licenses are probably of the same order of magnitude.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[ichimunki]

If Oracle really thought SCO had any legal legs to stand on, Oracle would put in a buy bid to SCO and Larry Ellison would stop playing second or third fiddle to you-know-who on the "World's Richest Man" lists.

Re:SCO is no real threat

[buffer-overflowed]

If Oracle says, hey nothing to worry about, and IBM says, hey nothing to worry about, and Redhat says hey, nothing to worry about.

The market cap of those 3 companies makes SCO look like a raindrop falling into the ocean. Their spiel won't influence too many.

God I Love It

[Col. Panic]

Oracle drops support for Netware in favor of Linux.

Novell buys Symian.

Oracle adopts Linux internally.

And the peasants danced.

Re:God I Love It

[Anonymous Coward]

peasants don't dance.

they rejoice.

Re:God I Love It

[j3thr0]

I thought they just ate cake.

They should move to OS X instead

[Anonymous Coward]

After all, Larry Ellison is an Apple board member.

Or maybe at least Darwin.

Re:They should move to OS X instead

[Anonymous Coward]

Oracle does run on OSX, but then it used to run on AUX too.

Re:They should move to OS X instead

[Anonymous Coward]

OS X sucks next to Linux. The only thing it's got going for it is a nice 'skin' and some 'special effects' that get boring real quick. I run Debian on my Mac.

Larry Hates Bill

[Crashmarik]

This isnt so much about linux as its about Larry Ellison turning plaid whenever somebody mentions to him Bill G is much wealthier than he is.

Re:Larry Hates Bill

[DaedalusLogic]

No this is completely true... mod this guy back up. At the America's Cup Ellison and Paul Allen had a minor pissing contest over who had a bigger mega-yacht. Ellison's sports a basketball court and can outrun most modern naval vessels... Paul Allen's had a helicopter pad and was something like 50 feet longer. Ellison's boat is called Katana, it's for sale too... anyone want to buy it?

Check this boat out!

http://www.yachtspotter.com/yotw.php

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/americascu p/ 134648524_newzealand07.html

Oh yeah and hooray for Linux at Oracle!

Re:Larry Hates Bill

[nelsonal]

On the flip side, I think that the only thing that matters to Bill anymore is ending up higher on the Fobes list at least one notch higher than Larry.

Re:Larry Hates Bill

[afidel]

Yeah after that my dad made the joke that Bill G should buy a supertanker or aircraft carrier and show em both up =)

Re:Larry Hates Bill

[Anonymous Coward]

It always puzzles me that anyone as rich as a Larry Ellison or a Bill Gates gives a fuck how rich anyone else is. I mean, at what point do you stop caring?

Re:Larry Hates Bill

[chez69]

it's part of the of being rich. You become obsessed with aquiring more money.

I'd wager that for Larry there is a while lot of ego involved also.

What'd they have before?

[groove10]

The article doesn't say what they were runnign before this switch. My hunch is that it was Solaris.

I get the feeling that most large desktop migrations happen from commercial UNIX to linux rather than from Windows to linux. That transition would seem much more difficult and costly.

Also are they using a distribution or are they "rolling their own"?

Re:What'd they have before?

[n3rd]

I get the feeling that most large desktop migrations happen from commercial UNIX to linux rather than from Windows to linux.

Actually Ellison (like McNealy) is a well know Microsoft hater. Althought Linux is one of the best developement environments available I wouldn't be suprised if the decision to swith to Linux was partially out of spite for Microsoft.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm posting anonymously because I work for the company in question.

The major platform for development was Solaris (and still is at the current time for me and my group). There have been various projects ongoing for awhile now to migrate the development to be Linux based.
And to address the specific question about migrating from Solaris to Linux (not from Windows), there was a plan being deployed in various groups to change the development environment before the Linux plan. The earlier one was to move to small cheap Windows workstations as 'thin' (ha!) clients to rack Solaris machines.

So, the Linux-based plan still shows a large loss of potential Windows licenses (for all the MS-bashers out there).

Re:What'd they have before?

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Undeniably, a large loss for Sun, too. But this migration fails to demonstrate what many want: that a non-technical workforce can move from Windows to Linux. You have neither a non-technical workforce, nor a workforce that is trained and comfortable with Windows.

Wake me when Geico moves their entire org, including sales agents, to Linux. Until then, while these moves are good, it only demonstrates the preference of engineer types, not marketing types. Unfortunately, there are a lot more marketing types than engineer types in the world.

Re:What'd they have before?

[at_kernel_99]

One of the questions in the parent of your post was:

Also are they using a distribution or are they "rolling their own"?

so, what is it? Red Hat was mentioned in the article, but my guess is that Oracle has to support a variety of distributions. Any other names? Suse? Pardon my ignorance, but who are the other big players, particularly internationally?

Re:What'd they have before?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I wonder if this bodes for YALD (Yet Another Linux Distribution). For 8000 machines, I would think it would be well worth the effort to make a custom distribution, or more likely, a modified version of an existing one, with extra packages or whatever for their own internal use.

Or maybe not, if they need to test their software on several major distributions. I would think that one common software setup on a small number of CDs (or DVDs) for the entire organization would be a good for easy maintainance.

Re:What'd they have before?

[nettdata]

Dude-

Don't make the assumption that everybody at Oracle is a code writer... there are LOTS, and I mean LOTS, of non-technical people working there. Just because it's a software company doesn't mean that every, or even most, employees are technical. And, most of them were initially running Windows.

Hell, Larry himself will be running Linux instead of Windows, as that's no different than all the marketing people, product managers, doc writers, etc., that are not "technical".

That's about as much of a non-technical workforce as you can get in modern business, even though they may have technical components.

It's not like the coders are going to drop everything and teach people how it all works.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same guy as above (again, anonymous).

I'm not in one of the groups doing the actual migrations, so i'm not privy to the information about specific distributions. But even so, I'm not sure if i'd say exactly which distribution would be used. After all, most likely it'd be a commercially available distribution (to get the support) and some certain people could use this 'insider' information to do some .... well, i'm sure someone out there could figure something out. ;-)

But, as another sidenote, Oracle has been doing specific builds & testing on a variety of Linux distributions for awhile now.
And for those with particular interest, I was helping someone who was doing some Linux-based work and they were running GNOME. Maybe we can turn this into KDE/GNOME issue! (just kidding)

Re:What'd they have before?

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Don't make the assumption that everybody at Oracle is a code writer... there are LOTS, and I mean LOTS, of non-technical people working there. Just because it's a software company doesn't mean that every, or even most, employees are technical.

I understand that; I would agree that only a sizable minority of the employees are technically inclined. I should have said so in my previous post.

That's about as much of a non-technical workforce as you can get in modern business, even though they may have technical components

However, I don't see that as being true. You don't think that Geico has less technical knowledge in it's corporate culture than does Oracle? Or even Ford? I think so, and I think one of those conversions would be much more interesting, and relevant, to more corporations. When Munich gets deployed, and feedback comes in, is when Linux proponents will know how likely Penguin World Domination really is.

Re:What'd they have before?

[mbadolato]

Maybe we can turn this into KDE/GNOME issue!

And while we're at it, were they using Vi or Emacs? ;-)

Re:What'd they have before?

[nettdata]

Sure, Oracle probably has more "technical" staff than Geico, but I'd bet it also has more non-technical staff than Geico.

Having spent a lot of time at the Oracle head offices in Redwood Shores, I can tell you that the "technical" staff are hugely outnumbered by the non-technical, and in a switch like this, it's not like the techies are going do drop everything and help or train the non-techies.

I'd imagine that, if anything, Oracle would be in a better position to come up with that "last mile" to help Linux easily replace Windows on the desktop, and probably have a better internal training system to deal with the switchover.

I also wouldn't be surprised if they used their own switchover as some sort of case study marketing to show the world how it went for them. After all, they are becoming HUGE linux fans, and I haven't heard much "Oracle on Sun" rumblings coming from them lately, but everywhere I look it's "Oracle on Linux".

Re:What'd they have before?

[fishbowl]

It also doesn't say what hardware they are running it on.

I hope they kept a few E-Class Suns. I'd hate to think that they don't have the platform I'm running the DB on.

But it makes me wonder if they are running Linux on sun hardware, and if they are, when do we get Oracle for Linux-Ultrasparc?

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well dude, how about Merrill Lynch, Charles Schwab, Deutche Bank, City of Munich, City of Largo, Burger King, Home Depot...

Those ones are not exactly technical are they, and they manage quite well with GNU/Linux.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also posting anonymously because I work for Oracle

Probably a fair bit of Sun gear has been involved, but I do know that the servers our internal E-Business suite used to run on were HP/UX.

Also, we no longer have any NT file servers - all been migrated to Oracle Files Online running on Linux.

As far a distributions are concerned, pretty much anytime anyone talks about linux here it is RedHat Advanced Server 2.1. Remember - we are talking about servers here. We have a pretty strong relationship with RH, and I can't see us 'rolling our own'. We're a database company. (of course that hasn't stopped us before.)

Just wish they would support us 'early adopters' running our non-existant* linux desktops better - in terms of 'well, it works on Windows/IE so you should be using that'

*well, according to all the 'anal-ysts' they don't exist

Re:What'd they have before?

[zurab]

Actually Ellison (like McNealy) is a well know Microsoft hater. Althought Linux is one of the best developement environments available I wouldn't be suprised if the decision to swith to Linux was partially out of spite for Microsoft.

Actually, they mostly used Solaris as stated by this ZDNet article.

Re:What'd they have before?

[MrLint]

Funny I remember when the CEO of Compaq told the troops that LArry said that tru64-unix was going to be the cornerstone of oracle development.

Course they also said no lay offs.

Re:What'd they have before?

[afidel]

I doubt it Geicko is probably like most insurance companies, they probably have a very large developer base. I can't speak to Geicko specifically but Progressive is based near me and I know several people who work there. The reason Progressive is so tech focused is that they don't really sell insurance. Insurance is just a way to get volumes of dollars in house to build up their float. In most markets the amount of profit an insurance company can make per person is fairly tightly regulated, and Progressive will often be below even this level, because they want to build up volume. The services of actually offering and distributing on the insurance is just costs, which is why they try to minimize these operations through technology. It might seem to the consumer that the fast claims process is there for them but it is really there to minimize the number of claims adjusters they need in any given area. They also have their strong web presence which is convenient for customers and cheap for them to process. Minimizing these costs allows them to maxamize the profit from the return on their float. Other than developers their largest employment area is probably call centers, for those users it doesn't matter what they run, it's probably just an interface to a black screen app or a modern GUI on front of a similar backend, which can easily be developed for Linux, for the remaining part of the staff (adjusters, actuaries and admin staff), they will simply have training costs, probably not significant compared to the savings achievable on the whole enterprise, or they can leave those personell on Windows.

Re:What'd they have before?

[jbolden]

How many E Class Suns do you think they were using as desktops before this? Of course they are testing Oracle on Sun heavily what's changed is the corporate desktop not the lineup for build, QA...

Re:What'd they have before?

[afidel]

Why install off cd or DVD, just network install. In the two large corp environments I have worked in both Windows and Linux were net-installed, windows by using commercial installer products and linux using Redhat's Kickstart.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting anonymously, since I work there too :)

As I understand the migration, its all about customers. If we'd sell the most systems on VMS, we'd all work on VMS. Since it was Solaris past many years, the primary platform was Solaris. Now we start to sell all on Linux and obviously Linux sales (either real or projected) started to surpass Solaris sales. So the company decided to switch. The secondary platform is still WinNT and the rest is in the hands of porting groups.

BTW I cannot wait till the migration is full speed. Who would want to work on 400Mhz Solaris box, when you can have Linux on 2Ghz PC running waaaay faster. And NO CDE!!

Re:What'd they have before?

[Lars Arvestad]

And while we're at it, were they using Vi or Emacs?

Of course they use Emacs, everything else is madness. No, the real question is: Are they using GNU Emacs or XEmacs?

Re:What'd they have before?

[christophersaul]

What's the feeling internally about the move from Solaris as the base database development platform to Linux? In technical terms Solaris and Sparc still have advantages over Intel and RAC runs well on Solaris.

I get the feeling that the Linux drive is more a business decision driven from the top. What's the feeling from the guys actually writing the products?

Re:What'd they have before?

[gentlemoose]

Oracle, as well as being a software company, is an enormous sales organization. Windows is the dominant line of operating systems on internal non-coder machines. Developers (plsql/iAS/etc) also tend to run Windows, although more and more are moving to OSX, Linux, and BSD. By and large, the the nontechnical salesforce doesn't know what to do with Windows, much less Linux. Bah.
The marketing push toward Linux isn't bogus. The Intel side of my datacenter is about 50/50 Win/Lin and in the last year, the ratio of new Linux to new Windows server installs has been about 15-1. That comes not only from internal demand, but also from customer and partner (hw vendor) pressure. I'm loving it.
FWIW, we also maintain plenty of Tru64, Solaris, HP/UX and AIX/etc systems.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

Emacs. I tried to run it, but I touch-type, and had to constantly look at the keyboard to do those three-finger dealies. Plus, I can't run it without thinking about a particular smelly longhaired hippy, and it's off-putting.

Emacs is a great operating system, though. Just needs a good text editor.

Re:What'd they have before?

[HellRazr]

I worked there back in '99 developing some of the higher-lever applications software. All desktops were Windows NT, but we had 1 Sun machine because we also targetted Solaris.

This was the time when Big Lar was on the Java kick. We converted an MFC-based stand-alone Windows app to a Java Applet. It really made no sense other than to migrate away from the Microsoft MFC framework (the product was stable and sold well). The Java applet was a 30 meg bohemoth that took 8 months to stabilize.

The Windows machines won't disappear: the Oracle apps will still need to target Win32.

It's great news that all of the desktops are migrating, however. Great move by the Big E.

If successful, maybe others will follow....

Re:What'd they have before?

[jazir1979]

Most developers at Oracle currently run windows 2000. I'm pretty certain RedHat will be chosen for the desktop .. it's currently not supported officially, but I know work is underway on it.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also are they using a distribution or are they "rolling their own"?

Oracle always "rolls its own" for internal use. It's called the Oracle Base Image--in this case, the Linux OBI. Ditto for Windows. The OBI has all the common software that all developers need, and that is supported by the Bastard Admins :)

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have neither a non-technical workforce, nor a workforce that is trained and comfortable with Windows.

[Ahem] I'll leave the argument about what really constitutes technical out (are people writing HTML pages on Windows really technical?). The company has lots of products (Developer Suite) that are used (customers) primarily on Windows. As such, even the development is done primarily on Windows, and Solaris is a secondary platform. OTOH for the server-side products (RDBMS, App Server) it's the other way.

But you're right: I don't see any of the Windows folks moving to Linux yet.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Gordonjcp]

Microsoft is in serious trouble if Oracle stop Windows development. Really, really stuffed. That would be their enterprise market right out the Window - no Oracle, no enterprise...

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am with Oracle. Talking about internal demand....

I work on a internal product, so we don't have to show off any pro-linux stance to anyone. Last year we were developing and deploying on Solaris. Now all our servers are on Linux.

Last year my team was using windows on desktops. Now half of us are on Linux. The other half is joining us soon. Linux is here and Oracle loves Tux ;-)

Re:What'd they have before?

[the_rev_matt]

Quite so. I knew a handful of people at Oracle between 2000 and 2002, and they were all non-technical people working as account execs, hr, etc. They all used Windows exclusively at Oracle, so a move to Linux will demonstrate a large user base of non-technical people to Linux from Windows. Granted, Oracle has the in house technical expertise to help those people.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can speak to this issue from first hand experience as a very recent (reluctantly but voluntarily for family reasons) ex-Oracle emp. There are/were three dominant OS's in Oracle: Solaris, Windows and Linux. All of the others are only used within the porting org. I had all three on my desk. My primary workstation was a Dell GX 240 running RH 7.3 with a 2.4.20 kernel. The others were a Toshiba laptop dual booting Windows and Linux RH 8.0 and a Sun U60 running Solaris 2.6.

I was in the minority but a growing minority. Slowly others in my group were switching over when they noticed that I wasn't banging on my PC cursing at a BSOD. (Pre-production databases and Apache modules will do that.) Most of the developers and Q/A people there just want to hack code and take what ever OS config is on the box when it is handed to them. (Tweaking the box just doesn't interest them.) This works because 70% of the company codes in either Java, Javascript or PL/SQL using JDeveloper (which is 100% Java) or an editor and SQL*Plus so the OS really doesn't matter. The rest is in C against a very robust portability layer using very strict portability guidelines that make those in the Linux kernel look like anarchy. And most of that was/is done on Solaris. So moving to Linux will be/is a no brainer. Bottom line, the development org will be/has been switched to Linux on the basis of cost and performance. And if it wasn't for the market dominance of Windows, there wouldn't be a Windows box in the mix. As it is, they are needed to work on bugs that are often Windows specific. But Windows is by no means the dominant platform.

All of the internal procedures are either web-based or email based, so all that is needed is a browser. There will always be MS Office and thus Windows boxes because collateral and presentations have to be produced and distributed to customers and prospects, most of whom have or use Windows. When Wine becomes much better, it might be used so that the only Microsoft product that is bought is Office. (I blew people away showing them Office 2K running under wine. Almost flawless but took a bit of work to make it work. You couldn't tell that the doc was written on Linux.) But don't expect Oracle to help with wine -- working on it won't sell any more 9i or 9iAS licenses so the resources won't be allocated to working on it.

On the server side, for example, a Dell 1650 dual proc box with 2GB ram & SCSI disks running RH AS 2.1 beats the hell out of a dual proc Sun U60 with 2 GB ram and SCSI disks on any metric you want to use. If anything is frosting Larry's and Scott's relationship it is this simple fact: the Dell/RH combo with greater performance @ $5,000 vs. the U60 box and lesser performance @ $25,000. Were do you think a big chuck of the $1B that Oracle saved came from? Scott's pocket. Buy INTC.

Re:What'd they have before?

[Fujisawa Sensei]

Are you kidding? Oracle moving away from Windows is potentially a good thing for Microsoft. That gives them more ammo to shove SQL Server licenses down people's throats.

Re:What'd they have before?

[pmz]

Undeniably, a large loss for Sun, too.

Not necessarily.

Wake me when Geico moves their entire org, including sales agents, to Linux.

Perhaps, one day, Geico will buy the Mad Hatter desktops from Sun. Sun already said that they will halve any quote from Microsoft. If Sun is willing to undercut to the point where Microsoft starts pouting--then crying and throwing a 3-year-old tantrum--, the Sun is in a position to very agressively market towards big call centers and sales staffs like Geico would have.

Mad Hatter could be Sun living up to its reputation of persistently rising from near-defeat.

Re:What'd they have before?

[christophersaul]

Not really. Large companies aren't interested in creating custom distributions... Why bother making your own when you can 'outsource' the process to Red Hat, for example?

Re:What'd they have before?

[treat]

After all, most likely it'd be a commercially available distribution (to get the support)

Redhat obviously. Good luck. Redhat's support absolutely sucks. Totally useless for issues more complex than "I can't be bothered to look in the documentation". For those issues, you still have to call back a few times and hassle them until they look in the documentation for you and give you the wrong answer. Oh yeah, and they're not always fluent in English.

8000 developers?

[YetAnotherName]

...and they still can't make an sqlplus client that supports readline.

Yes, I'm trolling. You would too, if you had to deal with Oracle on a daily basis---contractual obligations, you see. (Where's my MySQL when you need it?)

Re:8000 developers?

[parc]

And to add to the flamage:
When will they support a modern compiler? OCCI requires 2.95, for jebus' sake!

Re:8000 developers?

[Saanvik]

You can't be serious! Why would anyone want to work with MySQL when they can use Oracle's database?

Re:8000 developers?

[Papineau]

Could this have something to do with readline being GPL'd, and Oracle not wanting to release sqlplus under it?

Of course, readline (although it already exists) is something, functionnally, which could be reimplemented relatively easily by 8000 developpers.

Re:8000 developers?

[YrWrstNtmr]

And maybe they can get 9i to actually work reliably with various flavors of Linux, instead of throwing various subtle (and not-so-subtle) errors when it feels like it.

Re:8000 developers?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Where's my MySQL when you need it?"

Competing with Access to document peoples beanie baby collections. All of the real databases use oracle.

Re:8000 developers?

[Frater 219]

...and they still can't make an sqlplus client that supports readline.

Have you tried rlwrap? It effectively adds readline support to command-line interactive programs that don't have it. I've used it successfully with SBCL and other relatively complicated command-lines -- so I'm going to guess it'll work with Oracle's too.

Re:8000 developers?

[Micah]

Could this have something to do with readline being GPL'd, and Oracle not wanting to release sqlplus under it?

Almost certainly so.

But, OTOH, WHY should they not be able to GPL their silly command line client? That thing couldn't possibly have any deeply proprietary code or trade secrets.

Or can the client libraries not be linked to anything GPL? That could be a problem. (I'm not familiar with Oracle's licenses.)

Re:8000 developers?

[mikewolf]

hey, i have worked with SQL Server almost every day for the past 3 years, and while it is easy to use, i would gladly go back to using Oracle in a heartbeat, on windows, unix, linux, whatever... it is just better!

Re:8000 developers?

[Jade E. 2]

I believe you want YASQL, then.

Re:8000 developers?

[Knightmare]

You can link against GPL libraries in your code, but if you go in and monkey with the library at all to get your code to work you have to release those changes...

Re:8000 developers?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, that's the LGPL.

Re:8000 developers?

[Permission Denied]

Could this have something to do with readline being GPL'd, and Oracle not wanting to release sqlplus under it?

Most likely.

The readline folks are real fanatics. They've continually denied requests to put readline under LGPL - they want to make sure the only things that use readline are GPLed. That is, they're doing this on purpose.

Because of this debacle, the *BSD camp was forced to come up with the editline library for all their stuff. And then you have stuff like Sun's dbx that has its own readline replacement. And Oracle's SQL client, and Sybase's isql, and sqsh, ....

Now, it's not quite trivial to write a readline replacement because you have to deal with all sorts of crufty, non-portable *nix terminal arcana, but it's also not difficult. The problem is that all readline replacements are incompatible with each other. You can customize readline applications through .inputrc - this is really cool because you can make one binding and it works in bash, gdb, your (GPLed) console mp3 player, etc. However, these bindings won't carry over to FreeBSD's cdcontrol program or Sun's dbx.

The GPL also means that I can't use readline for some program I write for a client because these programs are usually internal company things that the company owns and can license however they want - they won't pay me if I stipulate that the code I wrote (which belongs to them) must be licensed under GPL for such a trivial reason. Since my clients won't be too happy paying me to write stupid terminal IO routines, I'm forced to either use plain old fgets or use editline, which (IMHO) is not as nice as readline.

The fanaticism is costing the *nix community some useful functionality, which is kind of sad.

Re:8000 developers?

[spitzak]

No you are thinking the LGPL. readline is the canonical (and perhaps only) example of the GPL actually harming development by blocking off something that is actually useful for development. Even if you intend to make your new program GPL there is incentive to not use it, as you might change your mind, also the inability to use it also makes you not learn it.

In most cases the GPL is applied to end-user programs where the only reason to link to them them would be to make a closed-source ripoff. Actually useful libraries that make it easier to write programs are almost always LGPL or similar.

Re:8000 developers?

[felipeal]

Yes, I'm trolling. You would too, if you had to deal with Oracle on a daily basis---contractual obligations, you see.

I used to have the same problem, until I realized emacs have a sql-oracle mode which calls sqlplus inside a buffer. 'Nouf said!!

Re:8000 developers?

[farnsworth]

...and they still can't make an sqlplus client that supports readline.

Do you need sophisticated, automated input? Use sqlloader. Need sophisticated, automated output? Use rman. Need sophisticated, automated schema management? Use sqlplus.

Oracle comes with gobs of very powerful tools, and sqlplus is just not designed to do what you think it should be doing. It seems like you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. It's like complaining that climbing a fire escape is hard when you live on the third flool. Use the stairs.

BTW, if your doing SW development with oracle, use tora(free) or toad($$$). Both these tools make poking around and doing arbitrary queries a snap. Or, take your pick of the thousands of jdbc-based apps that live on sourceforge.

Re:8000 developers?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's my MySQL when you need it?)

Well, MySQL's sitting in a shrinkwrapped box in the toy section, ready for when you feel like risking your career running a production system on a noddy platform. Oh, of course, you're some kind of hacker whos migrated his 1-user system to MySQL and knows how robust it is in the real worl ! How silly of me !!!!

Re:8000 developers?

[jbolden]

First off its sounds like the GPL is doing exactly what its supposed to in your case. Its requiring you to either free your software or accept reduced functionality. That's not a bug that's a feature; the hope is that with time people are always faced with that choice.

A company recieving code for their own use should have no problems with the GPL. Why wouldn't they want source code? Why wouldn't they want the right to redistribute your work as they see fit? Etc... I think its you not they who are worried about the GPL.

Re:8000 developers?

[ultrabot]

No you are thinking the LGPL. readline is the canonical (and perhaps only) example of the GPL actually harming development by blocking off something that is actually useful for development.

Qt?

Re:8000 developers?

[Tim C]

Where's my MySQL when you need it?

If MySQL would seriously be a suitable replacement for Oracle, then you need to talk to your employers, because they're clearly throwing their money away paying for Oracle. MySQL isn't in the same league as Oracle, simple as that.

As for sqlplus, if you're not allergic to Java (and many here seem to be...), there's a very nice Java SQL client available from sourceforge called SquirellSQL. It supports accessing any database that has a JDBC-compliant set of drivers, which at last count, was all the major ones and aquite a few of the less well-known ones.

Re:8000 developers?

[Steeltoe]

I think he means that he wants a history-buffer, just like the commandline in VI-mode. Very useful to trace back to what you typed in earlier. Readline also makes editing the line a snap, although by typing 'ed' in sqlplus, you can edit it in your favourite editor. Almost the same.

I don't understand your post though. Using sqlplus is what you're stuck with if you're going to write batchjobs. Sqlloader and rman are nice, although a bit limited when you're doing more complex stuff.

You can't use toad when you're on a production system that you have to go through some hoops to reach.

You're right that sqlplus is not what he uses it for. Sqlplus is like a scripting-engine, evaluating scripts on the fly. However, Oracle is responsible for proclaiming it should be used for interactive querying. Then, they should also make it more user-friendly when in interactive mode.

Re:8000 developers?

[jazir1979]

*riddup*

TOAD is fantastic. I even use it under VMWare .. tora is okay too, but it doesn't make a croaking sound when you fire it up, so that's no good.

Yes I did consider writing a shell script that plays the sound before launching tora. Still .. not the same.

The only problem with TOAD is all the blocking OCI calls and a single-threaded UI can lead to a very interesting experience with long-running queries.

Re:8000 developers?

[Nicolas MONNET]

readline is GPL'd and can't therefore be linked with a proprietary program. It would not have been too hard to develop their own, though.

Re:8000 developers?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, one more reason to use PostgreSQL.

Re:8000 developers?

[__past__]

Not to diss rlwrap, but dude, use ILisp for SBCL! Life without hyperspec-lookup and arglist windows just isn't complete. (But don't dare to (require 'acl-repl) when you do...)

And I've used the interactive SQL mode with pleasure, although not with Oracle. Some GPLed programs are really nice, you know? ;-)

(For those without a clue, I'm talking about Emacs modes)

Re:8000 developers?

[mce]

The GPL for readline is only doing what it is supposed to do if it actually manages to convince people to use the GPL. Please note that bash and friends do not count: they would be under GPL anyway.

Now that, I do know that there is at least one project that is GPL-ed because of readline. But I also know a lot of projects that refuse to use readline because of this and - get this - I even know a project that could be opened under LGPL if only readline would allow that. But readline doesn't, and so this thing remains internal and will never get distributed. What a ahame.

Some day somebody will decide that enough was enough and produce an LGPL-ed readline-compatible replacement. I know somebody will, because I've actually played with the idea myself.

Re:8000 developers?

[Anonymous Coward]

YASQL is a great tool. The primary developer and I used to work at the same company. I didn't contribute to development, but I suggested the name (my extremely minor claim to open source fame). He no longer works with Oracle and is seeking a new maintainer on SourceForge. I hope someone will pick up the task.

Re:8000 developers?

[Darby]

You can't be serious! Why would anyone want to work with MySQL when they can use Oracle's database?

Because they want a very fast, simple to maintain database server for an application which requires no transactional integrity?

Re:8000 developers?

[SquadBoy]

But of course putting the code under GPL would be transparent to your clients in this case. Think about it what are the odds that they are going to start giving away the code they paid you to write. :) As long as they don't give it away no problem. If they do give it away what are the odds that they care if that person can give it away? Assuming that they are not a software company what diffrence does it make?

Re:8000 developers?

[bzhou]

Work around: get readline source code (I'm using 4.3), build and install example/rlfe, alias sqlplus='rlfe sqlplus'. This program can transparently add readline to command line programs unaware of readline.

Re:8000 developers?

[spitzak]

No, TrollTech dual-licenses Qt, so you can use it, even though it is not free. Readline is the only useful library I am aware of that actually does not allow closed source code to use it.

Re:8000 developers?

[Grishnakh]

The GPL also means that I can't use readline for some program I write for a client because these programs are usually internal company things that the company owns and can license however they want - they won't pay me if I stipulate that the code I wrote (which belongs to them) must be licensed under GPL for such a trivial reason.

I don't see what the problem is. The GPL just says that you have to provide the source to anyone that you provide a binary to. It doesn't say that you have to release the source to the whole world. If you sell your client some GPL'ed code, the license requires you to also provide your client with the source code (which I imagine they would want anyway, since they're paying for it). If these programs are only used internally at that company, then the GPL has no further effect, because it only governs what happens when you distribute GPL'ed programs. The only problem would be if this company were planning on selling these programs.

Re:8000 developers?

[treat]

And then you have stuff like Sun's dbx that has its own readline replacement. And Oracle's SQL client, and Sybase's isql, and sqsh, ....

What a shame that these multi-billion dollar companies should be forced to release the source for the client-side (i.e. the most trivial piece) of their software in exchange for being able to greatly enhance its functionality by using the work of volunteers.

They could lose millions of dollars in sales! GPL is anti-american!

Re:8000 developers?

[Joey Vegetables]

There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.

You, sir, obviously have never tried a Moebius Pancake. :)

Re:8000 developers?

[Knightmare]

Ya your right, sorry bout that... I just remember having to pick through the licenses for a program we were working on, I forgot that all the stuff we were using was LGPL. Brain fart :(

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Half right

[Anonymous Coward]

There is precioius little Larry likes more than shoving his thumb into BillG's eye. But it makes perfect sense for them. The OS is free, and it runs nearly everywhere; you can see exactly what it's doing because you can see (and modify) the source code.

As a target platform for their software, it's perfect. Why run Oracle on Windows if you can use Linux on Intel? And if you don't want to spring for the expensive hardware, you aren't gonna use a proprietary Unix.

Re:Half right

[blind()side]

Once they roll-out linux desktops to their developers, it'll be interesting to see if pricing for Oracle license drops.

Good chunk of savings on UNIX hardware is ofset by buying more licenses for more Intel boxes. 8000 desktop licenses less for Oracle would be part of justification for price drop on their part.

Oh well, I hope I'll wake up soon...

Who needs MS Products?

[Anonymous Coward]

Slowly.. Windows is fading away in this town, 4 shops in this town of 75,000 near Waterloo, Ontario are pushing Linux hard and 2 just teamed with Oracle for there Group/Cal Software.

Obligatory Python paraphrasing ...

[YetAnotherName]

Simple: Larry Ellison is bucking for a role in the remake of the classic Python skit, Episode 41, Nigel Ellis.

PA System: Would Mister Larry Ellis please go straight to the manager's office? I'll repeat that...
(Larry wheels round and listens)
PA System: Will Mister Larry Mellish please go straight to the manager's office?

Re:Obligatory Python paraphrasing ...

[lightcycle]

Not to nitpick or anything, but if I remember my Python that would be Michael Ellis

Re:Obligatory Python paraphrasing ...

[Anonymous Coward]

umm, that was the joke, that it was in relation to larry ellison's misspelled name? If he had written Michael Ellis.. it would have made no sense.. correct? I think? Pants?

ad hoc calculator

[Anonymous Coward]

8000 developers * 700 dollars = 7 * 800000 = 5600000 dollars. Am i right? Subtract $8000 if you want, then the bill is $5592000.00.

Re:ad hoc calculator

[Anonymous Coward]

No wonder the Linux crew is so upset. They want a piece of the action.

Re:ad hoc calculator

[mcpkaaos]

For those of you (like myself) who had a difficult time reading the currency values without the appropriate commas, I'd like to present my contribution to the parent post:

, yada yada (some math) , ,, yada yada yada? yada , yada yada ,,.

Re:ad hoc calculator

[Anonymous Coward]

What the fuck are you babbling about?
And use the ',' key, ass-face!

Re:ad hoc calculator

[Captain Large Face]

if (5592000 < LEGAL_BILL)
{
fuck_SCO();
}

Re:ad hoc calculator

[Captain Large Face]

Ooops, that should read:

if (5592000 > LEGAL_BILL)
{
fuck_SCO();
}

What a dumbass.. :)

Linux on the desktop

[chunkwhite86]

"Oracle will move its base development platform to Linux, including putting the open-source operating system on the workstations of 8,000 developers"

Maybe this will answer the question "Is Linux ready for the desktop?" for other major corporations. Yes, a developer workstation is a "desktop" if it's their main business machine.

A heavyweight desktop-linux push is what is going to get businesses off the proprietary MS office file formats. When people realize that they are tied to .DOC .XLS and .PPT - and not tied to Windows per se, this is what will cause the widespread adoption of a truely open business document file format.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[swordgeek]

Linux ready for the desktop? Sure--it's finally catching up to Solaris, which has been on the desktop for decades!

Seriously, developers are the people who run Solaris, HP-UX, Linux, and so help me AIX on their workstations. As often as not, they've got a PC running Windows so they can read their corporate email, but for nearly 20 years, developers in Unix app shops have had Unix workstations on their desk. Putting Linux there says nothing about Linux's readiness for the "desktop" in the general sense.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Xoro]

Yes, a developer workstation is a "desktop" if it's their main business

Agreed, but I don't think you have to rationalize what qualifies as a "desktop" in that way. This move puts the all flaws of the linux desktop in front of 8,000 people ... who can fix them. Think of the bonanza for desktop linux projects if just 1% of these developers started submitting patches.

For an Open Source project, being put on 8,000 office worker desks would certainly be a sign of maturity and acceptance. Getting your project in front of 8,000 qualified developers is a gold mine.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I'm sure they can drop all their assignments to fix Linux whenever they want to.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe not. But if they work on linux GUI code anyway, for example, and something about the GUI bugs them every day, then they're likely to scratch that itch in spare time, just to make their lives easier. Not that I think Linux is very 'itchy' anyway.

Oracle in Austin, TX

[Yiliar]

I went for an interview at Oracle in Austin. Being a SUNOS/Solaris person for over 15 years, it was an eye opener to see the Austin facility was nearly 100% Linux.

When I suggested at the beginning of the interview that a person would have to be crazy to want to administer 8,000 diskless Linux servers tied to NetApps storage, the interview prompty ended. :)

My conclusion, however, was that Oracle is indeed committed to Linux. In fact they are betting the company on it.

Re:Oracle in Austin, TX

[Anonymous Coward]

When I suggested at the beginning of the interview that a person would have to be crazy to want to administer 8,000 diskless Linux servers tied to NetApps storage, the interview prompty ended. :)

I would've added that they just happened to interviewing someone whose middle name is crazy.

"You'd need to find a fucking lunatic for that job! But this is your lucky day... I read slashdot"

Re:Oracle in Austin, TX

[DigiShaman]

Jobs are hard to find, especially in Austin as it's one of the most tech heavy cities in the US. There, IT folks are a dime a dozen. So unless you've got mad/unique skills required for specific job, your going to remain unemployeed. As for me, I'm moving back to Houston in the next few months.

Re:Oracle in Austin, TX

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. This reminds of the time when I decided to
move our company web server from Solaris X86 to
Linux. The system admin screamed bloody murder. I
knew he was a Solaris guy and didn't want to learn
a new technology.

Too bad for him, I owned the company and he didn't
last there very long after that.

Re:Oracle in Austin, TX

[pmz]

...a person would have to be crazy to want to administer 8,000 diskless Linux servers tied to NetApps storage...

Why? The nice thing about diskless clients is that their /etc directories are all right next to eachother in a single hierarchy. It seems to me that this setup would be highly scriptable and managable in any UNIX, Linux, or BSD environment.

Nice, but...

[Tar-Palantir]

Could've happened to a nicer company. Ellison won one of the Golden Jackboot awards for pushing a national ID card system backed by Oracle databases. Here's the Google link for the stories.

Re:Nice, but...

[pmz]

Ellison won one of the Golden Jackboot awards for pushing a national ID card system backed by Oracle databases.

If business people weren't whores, would there every be any business?

I have, from some points of view, a personality flaw, where I can't work on something for long if I don't believe in it. However, human diversity provides many people who just don't care. This is why there will be no shortage of programmers for TIA and similar systems, and Oracle will be happy to sell the Oracle licenses to any buyer.

Re:Nice, but...

[pmz]

If business people weren't whores, would there every[sic] be any business?

I just remebered a saying: In America, for every man wanting to hang himself, right behind him will be a man willing to sell him the noose (or something like that).

QANTAS, Linux, Sun, Oracle and MS

[thelandp]

I work at QANTAS (Australia's largest Airline), and we're using Oracle alot, but not using Linux anywhere - we are basically a Solaris shop. The next major changes to our software infrastructure involve commiting more fully to Oracle. That may involve switching to Linux for servers, but probably not for desktops - they will stay as Win NT 4.0.

Now, I think Linux is technically great, and I hate the business practices of Microsoft. However, experience at QANTAS says that for us, Linux is not really any threat to Microsoft, it is much more dangerous to Sun. If we switch over to Linux here, we'll be doing Sun out of business, and Microsoft is unscathed. How is that good for the world?

Adoption of Linux on the desktop is a much bigger threat to Microsoft, and much harder to achieve because of inertia.

Re:QANTAS, Linux, Sun, Oracle and MS

[Anonymous Coward]

Adoption of Linux on the desktop is a much bigger threat to Microsoft, and much harder to achieve because of inertia.

Not to mention the SCO lawsuit and the fact that the Linux kernel infringes on their IP. tehehe.

Re:QANTAS, Linux, Sun, Oracle and MS

[mcrbids]

If we switch over to Linux here, we'll be doing Sun out of business, and Microsoft is unscathed. How is that good for the world?

It's not about "Us vs. Microsoft", it's about "Us vs. Proprietary Software".

Some things are services - such as TurboTax. It's software, but it's really an accountant's knowledge of the tax laws for that year embedded in software, and is more of a service than a good.

Others are goods, and are increasingly, commodity goods. An example is the Operating System - rapidly being commoditized by Linux. In a commodity environment, volume is high and margins are low.

Linux is really the market recognizing the commodity nature of things like the Operating System and things like Word Processing. There will always be plenty of service-related niches for things like regulatory compliance (see TurboTax reference above) and various other offerings.

How is switching from expensive, proprietary, commodity items (Solaris) to cheap, open, commodity items (Linux) *not* a good thing?

Re:QANTAS, Linux, Sun, Oracle and MS

[__past__]

If we switch over to Linux here, we'll be doing Sun out of business, and Microsoft is unscathed. How is that good for the world?

It's not about "Us vs. Microsoft", it's about "Us vs. Proprietary Software".

Obviously, you and me are not in the same "Us".For me it's more like good software vs. bad software. If there is more choice, chances are that stuff works better - because one size doesn't fit all, and because competition is quite useful sometimes.

If Solaris dies, that is bad. There are no advantages. If it isn't what you want, be it for technical reasons or because it is proprietary, you don't have to use it, after all. Yet, a damn good OS is lost, and probably a lot of jobs for people that did some cool things. (Ever used NFS, PAM or Java on Linux? Go figure.)

Linux is really the market recognizing the commodity nature of things like the Operating System and things like Word Processing. There will always be plenty of service-related niches for things like regulatory compliance (see TurboTax reference above) and various other offerings.

There are already people working in the service-related niches. Where would the sudden increase of demand come from if every paid closed-source developer would try to enter that niche?

If more people do a certain thing for free, less people will get paid for that. It's that simple. You might think that this is inevitable, and might be right, or that this is still globally better than the current situation, but don't fool yourself thinking that a massive switch to Open Source development will not destroy a massive amout of jobs.

"You can now flame me, I am full of love"

Re:QANTAS, Linux, Sun, Oracle and MS

[pmz]

How is that good for the world?

Every migration that doesn't end up with Microsoft is a good thing for the world. Regardless, you could buy those Sun V60x servers, if that makes you feel better.

So with all the cost savings they're getting

[Flower]

by deploying linux, does it mean they'll pass that along to their customers?

Sometimes I just crack myself up.

Re:So with all the cost savings they're getting

[felipeal]

by deploying linux, does it mean they'll pass that along to their customers?

Sure. Like the movie theaters lowered ticket prices after increasing revenue by selling ads before the movies...

Re:So with all the cost savings they're getting

[cerberusss]

So with all the cost savings they're getting by deploying linux, does it mean they'll pass that along to their customers?

Yes, because customers gain confidence that Linux is a viable platform. They're all (al least where I live) running HP-UX, AIX, NT or sometimes Solaris, and now the salespeople can tell them, Sure run Linux, we use it internally too.

Its Pronounced....

[Anonymous Coward]

Linu-fide. :p

Symian?

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume you're talking about Ximian, the authors of Evolution, and not Symbian, the OS that runs on most of our mobile phones???

Re:Symian?

[Col. Panic]

your first assumption was correct - i cnat speel

Re:Symian?

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe you meant Sybian??? That would be, shall we say...intriguing.

Re:Symian?

[hpavc]

oh that was truly worth karma, too bad you web AC with it

Re:Symian?

[Requiem]

Great! Welcome to Slashdot!

fuck slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

no wonder they suck, 8000 developers... the mythical man month

If...

[Anonymous Coward]

If Oracle is so committed to Linux, why can't they get their bloody 9iR2 installer to work on Linux without the need for several workarounds? Even on many of the supported distros this is a problem. And its been a problem for quite a while now.

Resigned Sept 2002

[bstadil]

Ellison No Longer board member of Apple.

Re:Good News

[Stephen Samuel]

Linux adoption itself has not been a problem (IMHO) for most realistic companies. However, converting 8000 developers over to Linux is a massive and interesting concept.

Not as big as you'd think (at least not for the developers). The base platform for Oracle (AFIK) is Solaris. The differences between Solaris and Linux aren't that nasty -- besides they already have to be linux-awere in their development tasks, anyways. It'll be a bit more work for the admins who'll need to learn which linux system tools replace the Sun-specific ones, but even that's not a lot, and there are probably fewer admins at Oracle than developers.

Note To Self

[PaintyThePirate]

Buy stock in Oracle Short-sell stock in SCO

When they support FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

Then I'll stop steering customers to PostgreSQL.

Re:When they support FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

BSD is kinda dead, dude.

It's about time.

[IGnatius T Foobar]

Definitely time for non-Microsoft bigcorps like Oracle to put their money where their mouths are. Seems ironic that companies like Oracle, with thousands of desktops, would continue putting money directly into Microsoft's coffers by buying Windows and Office -- money that will be used to finance Microsoft's attempted destruction of both Linux and competitors like Oracle.

If every company that Microsoft directly competed with (Oracle, AOL, Sony, Nintendo, IBM, Palm, RealNetworks, Novell, just to name a few) were to boycott Microsoft products for their internal use (still keeping, of course, whatever they need to do development of products which run on or with Windows) ... that alone could add up to hundreds of thousands of seats. That's a lot of revenue Microsoft wouldn't be able to collect.

Once the Oracle IT folks finish switching developer desktops over to Linux, they should then begin switching over their administrative staff as well. If Sun can run a multi thousand seat corporate network on *ix, so can any large company. If all Microsoft competitors followed suit, it would create enough momentum to jump-start mainstream adoption of the Linux desktop that much sooner.

Re:It's about time.

[nelsonal]

I would be surprised if Oracle uses any MS software besides the test servers for their Windows version of Oracle's database and other software. This is sort of like if SUN or Apple switched to Linux, Microsoft would only be marginally impacted, if at all.

Re:It's about time.

[pmz]

If every company that Microsoft directly competed with (Oracle, AOL, Sony, Nintendo, IBM, Palm, RealNetworks, Novell, just to name a few) were to boycott Microsoft products for their internal use (still keeping, of course, whatever they need to do development of products which run on or with Windows) ... that alone could add up to hundreds of thousands of seats.

That's what's so beautiful about Open Source: no one has to eat the competition's dog food. Open Source is sort of like a public field of tasty non-exhaustible corn available for all villigers to eat. Businesses have to love this.

Re:Interesting Support

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we both know the answer to that.

It seems once a company has adopted Linux the Slashdot crowd no longer picks on them. It seems like most people here have an attention span of 10 minutes when it comes to evil deeds of corportations in the past.

Just look at the bizarre hatred for Sun, a company who has been selling UNIX products forever, has created several well known open standards and is still pushing their non-Linux operating system.

has anyone implemented Oracle on Linux

[rnd()]

I have a friend who switched (a few years ago) to Oracle on Solaris from Oracale on Linux. His company recently spent US $400K on new Sun hardware...

What applications exist where you'd want to go with Sun hardware? Are there any left? My friend's experience was a few years ago. Have things changed?

Re:has anyone implemented Oracle on Linux

[swordgeek]

There's an easy answer: Seismic and Geological apps. In other words, oil R&D runs HEAVILY on Solaris, and despite Landmark and GeoFrame trying to get their stuff moved to Linux, I don't see it happening too quickly.

Quite honestly, I don't think I'd want to switch to an all-Linux (or mostly-Linux) shop. Solaris is a far more well _designed_ platform to run a company on than Linux.

As for Oracle, well this is only the beginning. I can't imagine too many shops will switch over for another year or two, but when it happens--it'll happen in a big way.

Re:has anyone implemented Oracle on Linux

[ziegast]

Have things changed?

A "few years ago" was the height of Sun's dot com bubble. If you wanted to run Oracle reliably, you bought Sun/Solaris/Sparc servers along with expensive storage hardware. Trying anything else was "risky". Compared to now, Linux was far more experimental. Oracle had just announced it was going to support Linux. Oracle's support for linux helped put companies like RedHat and VA Linux on the map. Early pioneers tried Oracle on Linux and bot burned. It's gotten alot better today now that Oracle doesn't have to keep chasing the moving target of the distribution du jour or kernel of the month to support their customers.

My biggest gripe about implementing Oracle on Linux is installation. Even with a generic RedHat Advanced Server install (one of their "supported" stable platforms), there are problems with with linking libraries or even just using unzip that just don't seem to make sense (should have been caught in QA). If you don't use their blessed commercial Linux OS distributions, you won't find any suppport from Oracle and scant support from the metalink user community. It helps if you know Unix/Linux enough to debug their shell scripts to figure out what's breaking.

Once we were done installation, our applications and databases ran similar Solaris systems (i.e. knowing how to make patches, managing backups, etc.). Our previously-Sparc-based DBA felt at home using the database tools on Linux. The best part is that our hardware and OS combined cost 25% comparable Sun hardware. We could afford to buy two servers and use the other as a cold backup. If we ever run out of memory, it's dirt cheap to buy more PC DDR SDRAM.

Now that Oracle is reportedly using Linux everywhere, perhaps they'll tune their installation process.

- a sysadmin

Re:has anyone implemented Oracle on Linux

[fupeg]

My company had a very difficult time installing Oracle 9.0.2 on Red Hat Pro 8. It simply did not work. We contacted Oracle and they had us go with Red Hat 7.2 instead. We have since installed RH 7.2 + Oracle 9.0.2 on several servers and had no problems. Still, would be nice to use Red Hat 9 just for its kernel with better multi-threading (oops here comes SCO...)

Re:has anyone implemented Oracle on Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, Oracle doesn't support redhat 8, so when it doesn't work and you can't work out why, don't be so surprised when Oracle tells you to use a supported OS.

I've installed Oracle 9i on redhat8 but I had to fix some scripts etc. After that I got everything running fine (rdbms, OEM, RMAN) with the exception of OMS, which seemed to have some java problem I didn't understand.

Redhat advanced server is supported by Oracle and has an older kernel, but it has alot of kernel stuff backported to it, so it's probably gonna perform better than redhat 7.2. It also has features and optimisations that were contributed by Oracle.

Re:has anyone implemented Oracle on Linux

[fupeg]

You are absolutely right that our inability to get Oracle to work on RH8 and Oracle's support response are entirely predictable.

I think it is worth note that despite Oracle jumping on the Linux bandwagon, they only support a version of the kernel that is 18+ months old. Oracle was an investor in a previous company I worked for, and we installed 8i on a version of Solaris that was slightly ahead of their officially supported version. When we told Oracle our plan their response was that it should work fine and that they would be caught up to Solaris within two months. Indeed, we had absolutely no problem.

Re:has anyone implemented Oracle on Linux

[Mryll]

Agreed... It is a bit ironic that getting recent Oracle products running on Linux is such an ordeal if that's becoming their preferred platform. They need to do a better job of documenting some things too - their OC4J standalone documentation seems pretty much nonexistent and the 9.0.3 Java-only version of 9iAS has an installer that can crash on XP pro. Tidy up!!

MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[SuperBanana]

(Where's my MySQL when you need it?)

Comparing MySQL to Oracle is like comparing a leaking dinghy to the Queen Elizabeth II. MySQL may be used by a lot of companies, but it's still a joke compared to even other open source SQL databases like PostgreSQL. Not to mention it seems like they're always having licensing issues(to the extent that MySQL support has been pulled from the PHP 5.0 development branch).

You want a serious, professional, stable database? Oracle, DB2, Sybase, etc. No money? Try PostgreSQL. MySQL substitutes some crazy locking in place of real transaction support. PostgreSQL not only doesn't need to lock tables for most operations, but it also supports very sophisticated locking. Oh, and did I mention PostgreSQL is object-oriented? The only two thing PostgreSQL is lacking is good replication support in the main release(it's still in development, I believe). That and full text searching is kinda funky(although very sophisticated).

I've seen so many "performance problems" that were due almost entirely to lack of proper database functionality in MySQL.

I can hear the scriptkiddies(PHP scriptkiddies) now chanting "it's lighter weight, it's faster". Guess what? You can make PostgreSQL just as fast if you turn off various sanity checks(these checks are better than what MySQL does) AND the more complete implementation of SQL actually lets you do more powerful(or perhaps efficient) queries. Who finishes a house first, the guy with a hammer and saw, or the guy with a truck full of tools?

Re:MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but PostgreSQL has very poor replication support.

Re:MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[pavera]

I'm developing a postgresql database right now,
and wow does postgre suck for development. You better get all of your table declarations perfect the very first time and never EVER, EVER have to change them AT ALL, because once you have one row of data in there, forget about it. T

he only way to edit a column definition is to delete it and readd it with the correct properties, which means taking the DB offline, copying the whole table to a temporary table, deleting the offending column, readding the column, and then moving all of the data back into the old table from the temporary one, and now since your columns are in a different order, you have to play fun games to get that to work right.. then you can delete the temporary table, and put the DB back online, PURE TORTURE.

MYSQL completely supports editing column definitions on the fly, thought 20 characters was enough for a column, but now you need 50? no problem. Thought 3 sig dig was enough for that decimal field, but now you need 8? Go for it... No such support whatever in PostgreSQL.

Re:MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[Anonymous Coward]

>Comparing MySQL to Oracle is like comparing a
> leaking dinghy to the Queen Elizabeth II.
This is a good analogy, except you don't need to say leaking.
There are a lot more dingies that QEIIs and a dinghy is probably the perfect water craft for rivers and lakes. Once you move the harbours and offshore you need a proper craft. I don't want to be in a dingy offshore. Some people might. Likewise mysql is the perfect craft for the river but for the Atlantic I'd rather be in postgresql or if I am feeling less experimental oracle and sybase.

Re:MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[kcbrown]

The only way to edit a column definition is to delete it and readd it with the correct properties, which means taking the DB offline, copying the whole table to a temporary table, deleting the offending column, readding the column, and then moving all of the data back into the old table from the temporary one, and now since your columns are in a different order, you have to play fun games to get that to work right.. then you can delete the temporary table, and put the DB back online, PURE TORTURE.

You, sir, are full of shit. Witness (the output isn't exactly what you'd see because of the crappy lameness filter and the limited Slashdot HTML options):

kevin> \d
No relations found.
kevin> create table foo (x integer, y varchar(20), z float);
CREATE TABLE
kevin> insert into foo (x, y, z) values (2, 'hello', 20.5);
INSERT 16997 1
kevin> select * from foo;
x y z
2 hello 20.5
(1 row)

kevin> begin;
BEGIN
kevin> alter table foo add column z2 integer;
ALTER TABLE
kevin> update foo set z2 = z;
UPDATE 1
kevin> alter table foo drop column z;
ALTER TABLE
kevin> alter table foo rename column z2 to z;
ALTER TABLE
kevin> select * from foo;
x y z
2 hello 20
(1 row)

kevin> \d foo
Table "public.foo"
Column Type Modifiers
x integer
y character varying(20)
z integer

kevin> rollback;
ROLLBACK
kevin> \d foo
Table "public.foo"
Column Type Modifiers
x integer
y character varying(20)
z double precision

So: not only can you do the operation without taking the database down, you can do it while within a transaction, and even rollback the entire change if you screw up!

This is under PostgreSQL 7.3.3.

Try that with your vaunted MySQL.

Re:MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[m_ilya]

It is not that painless. We usually do in our db migration scripts:

1. start transaction
2. rename existing table
3. create a table with new table definition
4. copy data from old table to new
5. drop old table
6. commit transaction

Works well for any table definition changes. Doesn't require taking the DB offline. Doesn't change order of columns unless you want it.

Re:MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[err666]

Whoever uses SELECT * should be shot on the spot, anyway. It is just asking for trouble, not only if the order of columns changes, but also if you add a new one, which happens often enough.

Do the maintanance programmers a favour, and *always* name all columns that you request explicitly.

Re:MySQL/Oracle = Apple/Orange

[pavera]

Right,
in mysql:
alter table bar alter column foo varchar(50);
how is that 6 liner easier than that?

Watching the games of ....

[3seas]

Seems to me that corporate is playing ping pong with Linux....

A good first step

[Norman Lorrain]

OSS marches on!!

Next they should migrate to PostgreSQL for their databases.

Oh. yeah.

Re: Imbecility

[quinkin]

Hrm, lets see.

a) This is an old chestnut (traditionally used to hang sh*t on a different country or other arbitrary grouping).

b) You got it wrong you imbecile...

Begone crack-monkey.

Q.

More info

[mbadolato]

There's another article here which offers a little more information, including the following, regarding PHP support:

Rozwat also provided new details on the launch of the Oracle Open Source Development Center -- an online service available through Oracle's online developer network, OTN. The new service will provide developers with software, sample code and extensive tutorials, free-of-charge. Additionally, the company has extended its support for scripting language PHP, including full integration and shipping with Oracle 9i Application Server.

"It is our goal to be a value-add to the developer community," added Rozwat. "With the development of the OSDC and our extended support of PHP, we continue to invest in the Linux development community. This will be an ongoing priority for us." Rozwat also noted that there have been more than 1 million downloads of Oracle software for Linux, illustrating the extensive, growing use of Oracle together with Linux.

WTF??

[quinkin]

Ummm, privacy invasion (lets not get back into that debate) vs. supporting open source software...

I object to one, and support the other. Sorry if that is a difficult concept for your addled intellect to comprehende.

Q.

But what happens when open source comes after them

[The Revolutionary]

Sure, it's easy for companies to see open source as a platform or environment for their products, but what happens when open source starts to move into their territory?

Of course Microsoft doesn't like open source solutions. Open source solutions are already, and are increasingly so, in direct competition with the products that make up their revenue stream.

Not all of these companies that are jumping on the open source bandwagon are going to be understanding and cooperative when open source comes knocking on their door: their revenue stream.

In fact, I'd venture to guess that the majority of them will be anything but understanding and cooperative. These companies are not adopting open source solutions because they want to advance the common good. They are not doing this out of community spirit. These companies are jumping on the open source bandwagon because they see it as a good economic decision; this is the bottom line.

When their bottom line is threatened, they will turn around, lash out, and bite the hand that feeds them.

They may not succeed, but they will try, and I for one know that I do not want to be the developer contributing to software that infringes whatever wealth of patents they are holding when that time comes.

...at least not if I can be held liable, which, if I am a start-up distributing this competing open source solution as part of a package to support my service-based company, certainly I can be.

I do not trust our new corporate bed-fellows.

I do not trust our legal system to protect me from them.

I do not trust our policy makers to even care about protecting me from them.

Oh that I could. Fortunately, or unfortunately, people like me just don't matter in this country of ours.

Well, if nothing else, at least our votes can help the existing power structure project the illusion that we ever had a real, actualizable opportunity to have our interests represented.

And that should be good enough for me, right?

Right?

?

Oh stop your bellyaching.

[moogla]

Plenty of people
have gotten it to work

Re:Oh stop your bellyaching.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why buy a product that is unsupported?

I'd rather suggest a product that has a support network and IS supported on FreeBSD - PostgreSQL rather than a product that costs $$$, and is NOT supported.

Part of the 'value proposition' in buying Oracle is support. That 'value' doesn't exist on FreeBSD, so why choose Oracle?

Oracle not all that serious about Linux desktops

[dcavanaugh]

At my company, we run Oracle Financials. We use a stupid little Windows app called jinitiator to launch the "javatized" version of Oracle Forms. Unfortunately, Oracle refuses to release a Linux version of jinitiator, despite what is probably hundreds of requests/complaints on Metalink and thousands more that really want the product. Java is supposed to mean platform independence, but somehow we get stuck with Windows anyway. All this rhetoric about Oracle supporting Linux is great, but the action is another story.

Summary

[SuperKendall]

A guy that flys a freaking MiG uses Linux! Now what is the coolest OS to have on YOUR desktop?

So, let me ask...

[IANAAC]

I'm assuming you're using some form of windows. You must realize that you have to do your own administration from time to time. Ever install/update your virus scan software? How about putting something like ZoneAlarm? And then make sure that the correct ports are correctly open/closed in the software? How about when you begin to think Windows is ruinning a bit slow? Ever have to go through your fonts and delete some of the unused fonts to speed up Windows? Guess what? That's desktop adminsitration. It's really no different with any modern Linux desktop. I'm always amazed when people whine about administration when, in reality, that's what we all do on pretty much any platform.

well

[tetro]

$699 * 8000 = $5,592,000 Thanks a bunch SCO!

The new meaning of SCO

[felipeal]

I'm not sure if someone already posted this before(it just came to my mind recently, I swear :), but here is it anyways:

SCO = Stupid Chief Officers

Re:But what happens when open source comes after t

[roystgnr]

Sure, it's easy for companies to see open source as a platform or environment for their products, but what happens when open source starts to move into their territory?

They either freak out and commit SCOicide, or they try and find more territory.

So far Oracle seems to have been doing the latter. It's not as if there aren't any open source databases, it's just that people trust Oracle to provide features and performance beyond what the alternatives currently deliver. If the alternatives catch up, then Oracle will have to produce something else to make their products more valuable.

And really, is there anything wrong with that? It isn't exactly common economic practice to make a product once and then expect to sell the same product over and over again until the end of time. The Econ 101 rule that price tends toward marginal cost is oversimplified, but it's not that far off, and with software your marginal cost is zero. Even if you never had price warring competitors or open source alternatives to worry about, eventually you run out of customers, who don't need to purchase your product twice because it never wears out.

So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Another big corporation that gives lip service to open source but continues to sell their own closed software for big bucks. Ask them to open up Oracle for Linux and you'll find out exactly how they really feel about open source.

About Larry...

[Nybble's Byte]

I never thought I'd have something to like about Larry Ellison. Maybe there's a ray of hope for him. On second thought, nah, forget I said that.

Ok troll I will bite

[codepunk]

We have been running postgresql for about 3 years in a production environment. The problem with postgresql is that number one it does not scale worth a shit. Number two it cannot be kept online 24/7 that in itself is some major faults. I run a system with databases consisting of simple data only about 15 million records or so. If we load on more than about 20 simultaneous users is slows to a grinding halt. I used to think that postgresql was the best database out there, if it is mission critical use a real database.

Re:Ok troll I will bite

[kcbrown]

We have been running postgresql for about 3 years in a production environment. The problem with postgresql is that number one it does not scale worth a shit. Number two it cannot be kept online 24/7 that in itself is some major faults. I run a system with databases consisting of simple data only about 15 million records or so. If we load on more than about 20 simultaneous users is slows to a grinding halt.

It seems that people's experiences vary on this. Certainly your complaints were valid in the pre-7.0 days, but PostgreSQL has improved an amazing amount since then, especially after the introduction of 7.2. The current stable version is 7.3.4, and 7.4 is right around the corner.

Much of the scalability issue you mention has to do with the default settings regarding shared memory, buffers, etc. The PostgreSQL developers have been very conservative about the defaults, because they want the database to run on the widest range of hardware possible. Unfortunately that leads to a "least common denominator" approach and the end result is a database that out of the box performs suboptimally on most systems in order to run on almost all of them.

But if you change the tunable parameters to values that are much closer to the actual hardware you're running the database on, the performance increases a great deal.

Some people have gotten very good scalability out of PostgreSQL as a result. I'm sure you're aware of the PHPBuilder article that talks largely about the scalability issues. That was written some time ago, and PostgreSQL has gotten quite a lot better since then.

It doesn't work for everyone. MySQL has the advantage of having a rudimentary replication mechanism out of the box, and its full-text indexing is much easier to set up and use. It's also much easier to upgrade between major versions (PostgreSQL requires that you dump and restore if you're upgrading to a new major version, e.g. 7.3 -> 7.4). But in the general case, PostgreSQL seems to me to be a much more capable database than MySQL is.

I don't know of any other database, commercial or otherwise, that allows you to write stored procedures in Perl, Python, or TCL. That alone might be worth the few tradeoffs.

If you're running a relatively old (7.1 or earlier) version of PostgreSQL, you might want to give 7.3.4 a try. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Re:Ok troll I will bite

[kcbrown]

The problem with postgresql is that number one it does not scale worth a shit. Number two it cannot be kept online 24/7 that in itself is some major faults.

One more thing: if you're having stability problems with the database and you're running 7.3 or later, the PostgreSQL developers will be very interested in helping you track down the problem and fix it. They take stability issues very seriously (but don't really have the manpower to fix versions earlier than the 7.3 series).

Try subscribing to the PostgreSQL Hackers mailing list and post the symptoms of the problems you're experiencing there.

Similarly, for performance issues, you should try subscribing to the PostgreSQL Performance mailing list and describe your difficulties there. If they can't help you then (and only then) try asking the guys on the Hackers list.

I've found the PostgreSQL developers to be extremely responsive, helpful, friendly, and extremely capable in dealing with PostgreSQL issues of various kinds, and they all seem very interested in doing the right thing for the community. I haven't seen a better example of the open source ethos in action.

Re:But what happens when open source comes after t

[The Revolutionary]

I think that what will have to happen is for an enterprise solution provider to see the stronger position to be to differentiate on the services provided rather than on the software its services are based upon.

When this happens, this solution provider will be able to be open to an open source development model. So long as the solution provider finds that the stronger position is to differentiate on the software on which their services are based, or that this software contributes to their ability to differentiate themselves, the provider will not be willing to consider an open source development model.

If an open source, corporate funded, development model is superior in this arena, I think it is just a matter of time before we see a shift in the decisions of solution providers who do not have the market share they they are after, or are uncertain of their ability to maintain their current market share.

If this happens, depending upon who makes the move first, I think it is then that we might expect to see legal tension with open source solutions at the enterprise level.

Advocating criminal conspiracy?

[kylef]

If every company that Microsoft directly competed with (Oracle, AOL, Sony, Nintendo, IBM, Palm, RealNetworks, Novell, just to name a few) were to boycott Microsoft products for their internal use...

If these companies were to execute such a strategy, would they not be guilty of criminal conspiracy to engage in anticompetitive practices in the first degree? (collusion to put a specific company out of business?) Isn't this just as illegal as what Microsoft has been charged with?

Call me idealistic, but I don't see how two wrongs would make a right here...

Let them fight Microsoft by making superior products that make desktop users or corporate IT departments want to switch. THAT is what is good for consumers! Don't force them to switch just because a bitter CEO issued a directive ordering the switch for political reasons...

Re:Advocating criminal conspiracy?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we're long past the point where playing fully by the rules will accomplish anything, at least here (the U.S.A.).

Re:Advocating criminal conspiracy?

[overunderunderdone]

If these companies were to execute such a strategy, would they not be guilty of criminal conspiracy to engage in anticompetitive practices in the first degree? (collusion to put a specific company out of business?) Isn't this just as illegal as what Microsoft has been charged with?

I don't know that they have to really collude with one another to do this. Individual company's could just decide that if Microsoft is going to compete with them they will stop bankrolling Microsoft be ceasing to use their products. Besides there is no law requiring you to use your competitors products. I'm pretty sure you won't find a Coke machine in the Pepsi or Royal Crown's break rooms - even though many "independent, impartial" observers may consider Coke to be the "superior product" or Coke may provide flavors that those companies don't. It's ludicrous to suggest that there is anything criminal about that absense.

Also there is a difference between "anticompetitive" practices and competing. Microsoft is a monopoly and so is burdened with additional rules that non-monopolies don't have. A lot of Microsoft's illegal practices WOULD be legal (if perhaps still unethical) if they weren't a monopoly. They were probably perfectly legal when Microsoft started using them but became "anticompetitive" and illegal once Microsoft crossed a threshold to be judged a monopoly.

Oracle's database developers reaction?

[christophersaul]

Solaris has been the development platform for the database for a long time. Solaris/Sparc still offer a lot of things Linux can't in technical terms and Oracle RAC, a cornerstone of Oracle sales reps' comp plans runs extremely well on Sun.

Changing the base development platform is a big move.

The Linux decision seems mainly to be a strategic business move driven from the top.

I'd be very interested to know how Oracle's developers feel towards the Linux move. They're the guys who really know the technical advantages between the various platforms Oracle runs on.

Re:Oracle's database developers reaction?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't speak to what the developers think, by my personal 3rd tier techie started asking me linux questions about 3 years ago, and was almost completely moved to linux a year ago, and quite happy about it (though less than happy everytime I mentioned that all my new workgroup apps used a mysql DB)

Re: Imbecility

[Anonymous Coward]

Q. What is the difference between a dead dog and a dead quinkin (601839) on a highway?

A. There are skidmarks in front of the dog.

Re:It's about time.-Mac attack.

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of Apple

So Larry Ellison is the new Hero???

[btakita]

Hmm,

Here's Larry Ellison. He told us he wants to buy out People Soft and lay off a bunch of people.
But, He's the hero because he likes Linux (more like he hates Microsoft and will use anything to make him top DAWG).

And then look at the "evil" Bill Gates.
He donated $15 Billion to charity and has plans to employ 5000 people.

Yes, I'm happy that Linux is being widely used, but Is it fair to create such a dichotomy of Good and Evil??

Will we demonize Bill Gates and trumpet Larry Ellison as a hero? Aren't they the at least the same breed?

And then, are we any better than Bill Gates? All the "wonderful" things we "would" do if we had his money.

I hate to throw religion into this, but don't judge your neighbor for having a speck in his eye when you have a plank in your own.

Re:So Larry Ellison is the new Hero???

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you're right about moral ambiguity; things are rarely black and white.

Please, however, see that $15B in charity at least partly for what it is -- another PR arm for the monolith.

Re:So Larry Ellison is the new Hero???

[I_redwolf]

I hate to throw religion into this, but don't judge your neighbor for having a speck in his eye when you have a plank in your own.

Then don't make it a religious statement. What I don't understand is this, how does an announcement of Oracle switching over their developer desktops to Linux have anything to do with making Larry Ellison a hero? Oracle has been saying they plan to move their entire infrastructure to Linux as soon as possible. This is just more of the movement becoming a reality.

Why you want to demonize either party in your diatribe above or make this out to some holy war makes you seem to be more of a zealot than not. The odd thing is that alot of Pro-Microsoft or Microsoft-biased persons are constantly screaming about how their is Linux zeal in every corner you go to. Of course, to deny that their isn't any would be stupid but I've observed the exact opposite, most if all discussions on topics like these seem to be Pro-Microsoft persons being extremely defensive and almost hostile to anything regarding Linux. Unbiased persons are alot more accepting of the concepts Linux itself is based on.

It would really help to keep your arguments about an issue actually on the issue in question and to not tie in other facts which are based on entirely different scopes and might have an undetermined amount of degrees of seperation involved.

Re:So Larry Ellison is the new Hero???

[btakita]

First, I'm talking mostly about people on /. It has nothing to do with Larry Ellison. The issue is on us as a "community".

The issue I bring up is a side issue, that comes up every time Microsoft is implied or mentioned. People chant "Bill Gates/Microsoft is Evil".

The odd thing is that alot of Pro-Microsoft or Microsoft-biased persons are constantly screaming about how their is Linux zeal in every corner you go to.

So, since I don't think Bill Gates is evil, I am a "Pro-Microsoft or Microsoft-biased person constantly screaming against Linux zeal"? You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about.

How am I demonizing the other party. I'm making a statement that people are too judgemental. It's oppressive when many people are judgemental. I hear alot about "judgemental" Christians, but this ire on /., and in certain advocate (protesting) circles, feels the same.

So lets just take the Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, and Joe Geeks of the world as we all really are. Humans who do both good and bad. There's no sense in typecasting somebody as evil, except to make us feel superior to others.

Re:So Larry Ellison is the new Hero???

[btakita]

Yes, charity is PR. It's PR b/c it is a moral responsibility for those who are rich (95% of Americans included) to help those who are poor and unable to provide for themselves. Bill Gates is "doing his part" in something we all should be doing.

What would happen if you talk to any one of the thoundsand's of people who were saved from this donation? I bet they are very happy Bill Gates gave that money.

I think Bill Gates should use more of that money on organizations like ApproTEC, instead of focusing on handouts. The old adage "Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime." definately applies here.

Re:So Larry Ellison is the new Hero???

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see, if a drug dealer start to donate his drug profits, would that make him a responsible and moral person?

Suppose he's paying taxes on his drug trade and now he gets a write-off for his donations is he still a "hero"?

Or, he's stealing from others to benefit his own name?

Re:So Larry Ellison is the new Hero???

[btakita]

Interesting question, however Bill Gates is not a drug dealer. Bill Gates is not a bank robber either. If he is "stealing" from others' business, he will be accountable for his actions.

I didn't say he is a hero either. He is just partially fulfilling his responsibility, as the world richest man, to make the world a better place.

Check this out...
What if the world were a village of 100 people?

Sad thing is, the industrialized countries, particularly the United States, do not do enough to help the other countries.

I wish more people, like Bill Gates, recognize their responsibility to help others. Note that I'm saying Bill Gates is responsible to do this, not a hero for doing this.

Money/Mouth

[Anonymous Coward]

So when are Oracle going to put their money where their mouth is and do something to protect Linux? It must be about time they sued SCO eh?

Colaterol Damage

[rf0]

Have the problem with the SCO lawsuit is that FUD they are spreading. Even if they don't have a case to stand on an IT manager will just here. SCO suing people over Linux therefor something is wrong with Linux.

Prehaps SCO want to be bought out by Microsoft as they are doing more damage than MS ever has even with the halloween documents

Rus

Re:Bye Bye Oracle

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine be completely database agnostic, running clustered J2EE w/ JDO, XML, XSLT and such, and all that on some real filesystem, like ReiserFS. Microsoft won't have that never, because their karma's simply too bad.

Re:Oracle not all that serious about Linux desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

JInitiator isn't actually really needed at all on Linux. The only reason it's there on Windows is to provide a sane JVM for the Forms apps to run on. Thankfully, sane JVM's are available for Linux...I've been running Forms apps quite happily on Linux with both the Sun and Blackdown JRE's, version 1.41.

Here's the trick:

This probably varies depending on the application you're using, but what you need to do is append this argument to the relevant URL (i.e. the one that would normally launch JInitiator): "?jinit_mimetype=application/x-java-vm". This will force your browser (I know it works with Mozilla) to use its own Java plugin instead of trying to find the JInitiator plugin.

No, it's not officially supported. But - yes, it works just fine!

(Another tip: Forms apps like using Control-F11 - make sure your window manager isn't trapping this key - KDE does by default)

Oracle's VP is lying

[Anonymous Coward]

as their website, clearly a part of one's infrastructure, is running ... Solaris:

The site www.oracle.com is running Oracle9iAS/9.0.2 Oracle HTTP Server Oracle9iAS-Web-Cache/9.0.4.0.0 (H;max-age=214646108+0;age=5133) (H;max-age=214701216+0;age=6106) on Solaris.

And, no, they can't blame it on their hosting provider: the Netblock is owned by themself: Oracle Datenbanksysteme GmbH

Re:Oracle's VP is lying

[Anonymous Coward]

the company has moved its IT infrastructure to Linux

The company says it's running its internal business on Linux-based systems.

Fucking troll. Read something. Anything.

Tux Crossing

[hackrobat]

Folks, check out these signs all over Oracle HQ if you happen to pass by that area. They seem to have been around for quite a while.

Who's fault?

[screenrc]

Perhaps. Although it is more accurate to say that
the problem is not SCO circulating fud, but
how the IT managers respond to it.

I could go around my town informing everyone that
from March 23, 2005 , the Sun will stop rising from the
East and start rising from the West.
Will it be my fault if people start believing me?

No, it is the fault of the IT managers who are apt to
believe just about anything, and it is the fault of
(the even more) idiotic journalist who will by quick with
their usual articles: the Linux community
don't take the claims of screerc seriously, but consider:
"What if srceenrc is right and the Sun starts rising from the West?"

Now this is really, really cool.

[NerveGas]

There are lots of stories about how company XYZ is using Linux. However, this one has potential for a *real* benefit to Linux. Why?

Well, when Oracle, with cash flowing out of it's orifices, finds something in Linux that they'd really like to have improved, they have plenty of resources to improve it, which benefits Linux.

If some small, third-world government adopts Linux, that's great. But they're still not going to give anywhere near as much back to Linux as companies like IBM have been able to. Oracle stands a pretty good chance of giving quite a bit back as well, and I think Linux will be much better off for it.

steve

Re:Now this is really, really cool.

[Plugh]

Quoth the poster:
if Oracle ... finds something in Linux that they'd really like to have improved, they have plenty of resources to improve it

Actually, that's not an "if". In fact it's already happened. To support Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC), they had to implement a Clustered File System for Linux. That was done, and released under the GPL:

http://oss.oracle.com/projects/ocfs/

Heard that PeopleSoft will be running on Linux

[BlackListedCard]

I've heard that PeopleSoft will be the next big guy to run their products under the Linux environment. Better development platform to make changes to their product. Can anyone confirm?

Re:But what happens when open source comes after t

[jcaplan]

Remember support. Oracle is not just a development house. They have the kind of support people you want when you have problems. They are knowlegeable and expensive. Even if PostgreSQL someday acquires all the features, reliability and reputation of Oracle databases, Oracle will have plenty of business with their fine team of DBAs. .Nar barnen lagt .sig

Re: yet more mysql 1.0 beta arguments

[pacman on prozac]

mysql support is dropped from PHP5 because there are now 2 versions of the libs knocking around for mysql 3 and 4 which apparently don't play well if you get them the wrong way round with the server version.

so php could either bundle both and put up with 1000s of whiners who couldnt work out which they had installed, or just use the one installed on the system by mysql.

its hardly been dropped.

mysql 4 hardly uses "crazy locking" either, but then 3 hasnt for ages either if you rtfm on howto set it up properly...

Re:Oracle not all that serious about Linux desktop

[dcavanaugh]

Thanks for the info; I'll give it a try.

I just wish Oracle would give us a supported/documented way to do this as opposed to an unsupported hack. Even if it's just a script that does what you suggest or a document that says "this is how to do it.". After all, if Linux is really a mainstream platform for Oracle, they would have something to say other than "Windows required".

Who the !#$% is "various?"

[bourne]

From the article: Oracle maintains its bullish stance on Linux, despite the copyright, intellectual-property, and unfair competition lawsuits introduced by various players in the market.

Who are the various players? SCO, SCO, and SCO?

This article makes it seem like Linux is the churning center of numberous legal actions by disparate parties, when to the best of my knowledge, there's just one bad apple (SCO) throwing (vague, unsubstantiated) accusations around weekly.

Surely if there were other Linux-related legal actions going on /. would be covering them daily!

Who is behind the FUD?

[Walrus99]

As the battle heats up it becomes more and more obvious that SCO doesn't have a leg to stand on. Their moves are becoming more and more irrational. So what is their motive? They obviously can't win the law suits or make any money off their ridiculous licensing claims. Their motive must be to discredit Linux and the GPL. Now who would stand to benefit from this? Microsoft. There must be a direct link and collusion between Microsoft and SCO. What is needed is either a public or government investigation of this link and its misuse of the court system. While Bill Gates will probably escape any prosecution (again) the real power behind the FUD being spread by SCO needs to be revealed in the court of public opinion.

OK off my soap box.

Re:Who is behind the FUD?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell me, how many threads are you going to post this comment in?

Re:Who is behind the FUD?

[Anonymous Coward]

duh! who spun off SCO a few years ago? answer: M$, that who

Why replace Solaris with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Solaris is better than linux (more estable, better at
handling load, runs almost the same tools -i.e. GNU stuff-). Technically the
hardware that runs Solaris is also better. So, what is
the reason ?. Is it because the cost of hardware ?, or is it
because Linux is going to be better than Solaris soon ?.

Just wondering...

Re:Why replace Solaris with Linux

[marktoml]

It is a little of all of the above and a dash of walking the talk... Larry has been quite vocal about support of Linux.

Re:Good News

[SoTuA]

The base platform for Oracle (AFIK) is Solaris.

That might be the case, but they are shoving linux down our throats. I went to a Oracle Developer Days Web Services two-day seminar last week, and they were giving "Oracle makes linux unbreakable" leaflets, and the gifts where linux tshirts and baseball caps.

I think they are pushing the Oracle 9i + Redhat AS2.1 combo. Nice one, I would say...

Microsoft must be laughing all the way to the bank

[msafar]

Initiatives like this crack me up. Sun, Oracle and Lotus are obsessed with making Microsoft look bad. It's like the middle-class kids egging the rich kid's Beamer at night, only to return to their '82 Tercel for the rest of school year.

Competition in software comes from innovation, not religion. Why would customers give one damn what platform the developers use?? Answer: They don't.

Oracle is serious about linux desktops

[Ur@eus]

Hi,
The latest releases of 11i ERP do support running Oracle applications clients out of the box with the standard Sun java plugin under Linux. The certification process isn't done yet however, but we are working on it, so hopefully support for Linux and Solaris clients can be officially announced soon.

"You've been de-supported"

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't find it on Oracle's or SGI's sites, and only one small reference here, but we're scrambling to get a new system since Oracle has dumped the SGI platform. We'll likely have to spend the rest of this FY's budget getting new hardware/OS (HP's) that Oracle still likes, leaving nothing for actual development. There are still lots of all-SGI shops in the government/science sector, and we're all just a little peeved.

Postgres and development

[abulafia]

You're either using a really old version, you don't know what you're doing, or your trolling.

I've been doing DB development for 12 years and have worked on at least 8 different DB platforms (I'm probably forgetting some), and Postgres is hands down my favorite so far.

You can change just about anything you want in a PG table on the fly. There are a few things that are mildly tricky to change, such as whether or not a column is compressed, but even that can be changed without taking the database offline.

Altering a column definition is a 5 line process, which can be done within a transaction, so that it doesn't affect anyone else connected. Try that on Mysql.

Postgres' main problem right now is that they ship with exremely conservative default parameters, in an attempt to run everywhere out of the box. This is fine for DBAs who actually do thier job - of course you should learn and tune the DB. The problem is that Mysql refugees who aren't used to using a real DB (sorry, flame me) play with it for 10 minutes, decide performance sucks, and badmouth it for eternity.

Postgres doesn't compete with Mysql - there is no competition, PG wins hands-down. Postgres competes with Oracle.

Re:But what happens when open source comes after t

[pmz]

Not all of these companies that are jumping on the open source bandwagon are going to be understanding and cooperative when open source comes knocking on their door: their revenue stream.

My argument is simply this: any company whose only revenue streams can be obseleted by Open Source software is a company that doesn't deserve a future. I know that sounds harsh, but that's just too bad.

Open Source is the natural destination for commodity software. We are clearly at the point where all the money to be made on word processors, for example, has been made, and, thus, OpenOffice.org is sufficient, free, and persistent (it's here today, and it will be here tomorrow, and the next day). If you don't like OpenOffice.org, then there are still alternatives, such as Abiword. Microsoft Word's days are numberered--there is simply no other future for it, unless unnatural things like legal loopholes or corporate welfare allow it to limp along like some sort of mutant irradiated dog kept alive in the name of science (just kill it dammit!).

Re:Microsoft must be laughing all the way to the b

[lawaetf1]

You suggest that Larry's move is inspired purely by anti-msft sentiment. Let's see, linux is free, stable and becoming commonplace. More and more Oracle installations are run on Linux (my nice new $30k linux server is making Oracle dance) so it sorta makes sense that Oracle pays more attention to it. Larry didn't become a billionaire by being petty.

Re:Microsoft must be laughing all the way to the b

[msafar]

A relatively small percentage of Oracle installations ran on Windows NT anyway. I don't doubt that moving to Linux workstations will save Oracle some money, but the point is: who cares? Oracle will compete/win only by having the fastest, lowest TCO, highest ROI database servers and applications, whether they use Windows or Linux, and whether they develop in .NET or Java.

I've always thought that people should pick the application first, the middle-tier(DB) second, and the OS last. Selling a Windows 2003 server to run a great application is a lot easier than selling a crappy application than runs on Linux!

Its all about MONEY

[grigori]

This is only about MONEY. Ellison doesn't care about Linux, Palmisano doesn't care, etc you get the point. Ellison pushes Linux because
(1) got almost all the Unix market already and little room to grow
(2) Linux is growing fast and is new growth place
(3) if he doesnt move now people will get used to running mySQL or PostgresSQL and then he will be an unhappy boy.
(4) if you run cheep hardware and OS you can spend more on Ellison

And IBM likes it because its the only way out of their deadend OSes and sells consultant $$$

Got it everybody? They dont care its only the $

Re:Its all about MONEY

[Anonymous Coward]

You, sir, are an idiot.

Name one business that isn't trying to make money. Pretty hard, huh? Moron.

Re:Its all about MONEY

[grigori]

That's not the point, anonymous coward dork - it's that they POSTURE about how they're doing stuff for Open Source, or humanity, or whattever goddam thing. Lots of people on /. act as if that's whats happening, and fall for the BS.

Thanks for the useless post, dipshit

Right!

[Col. Panic]

I realized it about 2 minutes after posting.

ain't that a bitch!

Re:Oracle not all that serious about Linux desktop

[dcavanaugh]

In my case, the URL that worked was

http://machine.domain.com:portnumber/dev60cgi/f6 0c gi?jinit_mimetype=application/x-java-vm