Slashdot Mirror
Large Scale Management - Linux vs Solaris?
A not-so anonymous, Anonymous Coward asks: "I work for a college that offers undergraduate computer science classes, and the school would like to add a new lab with about a hundred computers for students to use, for various class projects. After some non-trivial effort, we convinced the school to set up a Unix lab rather than a Windows one. However, we can't decide whether to go for Solaris or Linux. Regardless of the cost of hardware, I couldn't get agreed with my colleagues about the amount of efforts required to manage a hundred of Linux PCs vs. a hundred Sparc boxes. I believe that there are many Slashdot readers are actual managers for labs like this if not in large scales. What are your experiences of managing Linux PCs versus traditional Solaris boxes?"
"My detailed questions are:
1. Compared between these two different systems, how easy to maintain the software for all these machines (including re-installation, patching, and updating)? What software do you use to make these management jobs easier?
2. Are there any fundamental differences between managing a large group of linux PCs and managing a large group of Solaris boxes?"
My college uses 64 Sun Ray's attached to a E450. It works flawlessly. They system is able to handle the loads just fine. Haveing a Sun Ray environment enables them to have a central point in which they can upgrade and patch rather than having numerous machines in which to admin.
Most computer labs should disable booting from CD - allowing your users to run arbitrary software will eventually result in a visit from the FBI.
Hacker != cracker
What you are talking about requires malicious intent. Are you saying that Linux was created out of spite?
Hacker means programmer. Just because the knowledge to create includes the knowledge to destroy does not mean that those who create necessarily destroy. Malicious intent is independent of computer knowldege.
All data is speech. All speech is Free.
On the other hand, there's no reason you have to run Linux on Intel. You could get Macs, as one person suggested, or even load Linux on Solaris. Of course, if you get Macs, why not run OSX? Frankly, I think OSX is the nicest UNIX variant out at the moment, it runs everything you'd expect UNIX to run, AND it has two important bonuses for your purposes: (1) Microsoft Office available and (2) the NextStep programming environment (Cocoa), which is widely regarded as one of the finest ever made. It is also very managable, includes good and robust Java support, and Apple does a good job with updates and the like.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
You're going to read justifications from both sides of the fence, then all kinds of reports to discount assertions made by each side, plus random alternative advocacy for favourites like MacOS X. Your problem isn't picking "the best" option; it's that your team can't (or won't) stop arguing about it and while this drags on, the people you convinced to go with Unix over Windows will wonder if they couldn't have had a W2K network in the same time.
Face it, when you pick one then you'll have to make it work in a consistent, reliable and centralised fashion because you won't be going back. And you can do that with either Linux or Solaris because the solutions you want exist for both; in many cases, it's the same (Unix) software, like Cfengine. Don't spend too long worrying about which is easier or harder to set up and manage; once you've learned how with either OS, which you're going to have to do anyway, then it will be "easy".
Ade_
/
Big Bubbles (no troubles) - what sucks, who sucks and you suck
If you are concerned with the educational value. I would suggest that you use both. Half Sun and Half Linux. Using Both platforms helps teach the students the difference and similarities between the two platforms. As well any programming differences. But the two platforms are similar enough to install the same set of GNU tools. You want your students to go into the market place with a good verity of platform knowledge. Plus if a class needs all Suns or all Linuxes they can just SSH to each other and open a remote X display for any GUI tools that they need. This helps encourage good platform independent programming.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
And they don't have that many people doing sysadmin.
It's more of who is the sysadmin, how much control the sysadmin has over the systems and what the systems are for. And then there's the budget of course.
With Linux and the *BSDs a lot of the tools come free. If you're going Linux pick a distro that you find easy to do mass updates for.
As I had posted earlier, this is the solution my university prefers. Since posting my comment I've poked around on the internet looking for similar "ultra thin" (as opposed to just thin) clients, but have found no well known solutions outside the Sun Rays. I really can't think of anything that is more appropriate for mass administration. I have never suffered lag or slowness, although there are occasional problems (usually network related, I assume) to small clusters of terminals. As much as everyone loves the OSS poster child, Linux, I think that it would clearly be more difficult to administer and maintain that a few quasi-monolithic Sun servers. Is it possible to manage a lot of linux/*BSD/Whatever machines? sure. But I think it's clear none is easy as ultra thin clients and Solaris.