Slashdot Mirror
Linux Servers Break out of HPC into Enterprise
Jane Walker writes "Watch out, IBM, Dell and HP. Linux server vendors that have carved out a space in high-performance computing markets are taking their tailor-made servers into new enterprise markets, providing a welcome change for businesses that want to save money and get customized products."
I've always been a fan of building, installing and maintaining my own Linux server. :-)
We need to back up 2 Terabytes nightly from 65 schools for our district. RSYNC on a Linux backup server has been the only way we have found that works for this. And we are saving a cool quarter million dollars yearly versus a commercial enterprise solution.
Moderation in All Things... Especially Moderation - gurutc
Does this mean Scotty can now get more power when Kirk asks for it?
I didnt know Linux made servers.
This makes sense, since David A. Wheeler has had a lot of good things to say about Linux servers. Plus, I've kept a Linux server/router working for a while elsewhere.
So all this time Linux was the predecessor to LCARS?
COOL!
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
But can you build a Beow ...
o wait I guess you can
+1 fashionably cynical
Each license of Redhat Advanced Server Linux costs me about $1200. How exactly does this save me money? Linux has its uses as does Microsoft Windows 2003, but I don't use Linux because it saves me money in the enterprise. For home users, yes, it might save money although with XP Home being bundled with $299 computers like at Dell I find that hard to believe. For enterprise users, no, price is not an issue.
So, the crew of the Enterprise now uses Linux?
By the Trekkies, for the Trekkies, eh?
Am I the only one that thinks this looks like an episode synopsis you could see in TV Guide for a Star Trek episode?
"Captain! The Linux Servers have broken out of the Hydrogen Pressure Chamber! They're spreading like Tribbles! We can't hold them off for long!"
EMC (leading enterprise class storage provider) has made it possible to use EMC Symmetrix and EMC Clariion enterprise storage cabinets with Linux. HP has ported HP ServiceGuard - enterprise level high availability cluster software to Linux. Yes, I would say Linux is enterprise ready.
No, it's difficult to find reliable free distros that will support the features of higher-end woes. I still subscribe to the Poweredge Linux list and it is full of tales of woe from people trying to use free distros, mostly due to RAID controlelr problems.
OTOH, Dells with supported (RHEL and SUSE) distros seem to be OK, and DL380s (The Cheap Server of the Gods) seems to be even better, although I had a heck of a time a few months ago tring to get the serial port and LOM to work together during boot. (Mostly that was incompetent HP support. Eventually we figrued out the magic BIOS settings to get it to work.)
So realible hardware is out there but it seems to be going hand in hand with the pay-for-support distros nowadays.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
...in a five year timewarp?
ps- 'Enterprise' doesn't mean anything.
Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
As far as I am aware Linux has been bigger in the enterpise than it has in the home pc market. For instance my college runs damn near all of the their systems on IBM eServers running Red Hat Enterpise Linux 4. This article sounds backwards to me.
The Linux Servers know what's best for you... =)
Only fools would pay for $1200/license to use somebody's pre-packaged open-source software.
If you have more than one license, you could easily hire someone full-time to do upgrades on your servers and use a free linux distribution like Fedora or Gentoo. (Or even consider the *BSDs). Plus you get someone you can immediately contact in the case of a problem (rather than a phone number).
I realize you are probably concened with uptime and availablity (and hence pay for the enterprise editions), but what kind of stuff are you really doing? A simple web or sql server can be handled very easily by a half-way competent admin. Yes it may be vitually important, but it if it is simple, then why bother with Redhat?
And if it isn't so simple, then do you really want Redhat holding the gonads of your operations? What are they going to do for you that a dedicated employee wouldn't?
The keywords here are 'Scale' and 'cost'. Look it up at dictionary.com.
Why you would need supercomputers to do run weather models and simulations, eh? After all, Start -> Run -> Calc on your Windows XP SP2 can do 1 + 1 = 2 (mostly). Moron!
Seriously. It's become so watered-down it's useless as a description. Every jackass and his dog thinks he needs an "enterprise-level" solution. WTF does it really mean?
If "Enterprise" means "I'm so stupid I'm willing to overpay for a product or 'solution' [which just means 'product you keep paying for every quarter']", then, yes, Linux is very much ready for enterprise setups because it's actually pretty easy to get people to overpay for Linux-based enterprise-level solutions rather than just hire competent IT staff in the first place to implement something.
All's true that is mistrusted
The submission makes it seem like these companies are moving into the "enterprise-level computing" arena dominated by the big players. What the article ends up saying, after the hype, is that these companies are putting together custom-build server sets that use Linux. This is news? Oh, wait, they're "breaking out of HPC" .. yet everything in the article is pretty much devoted to describing their HPC builds and customers. Yes, that's neat, but what does that mean in terms of competing with the big three? Ah...they have plans to move into the "enterprise"! OK, again, it's neat what they're doing, but they're still niche players, and I'm still not seeing how they're any threat to Dell, HP, or IBM. Those three already have and support Linux, a pretty good range of hardware, support, and marketing capability. I think there's a place for these other companies, and they're doing some really incredible things with Linux - but I don't see them pushing the big three.
It means that Picard will get another chance to kill with a crossbow.
Each license of Redhat Advanced Server Linux costs me about $1200.
Yup, that it does...so if I choose to use this box for a PostgreSQL database server it costs me $1200...if I decide I want RedHat's support and whatever other goodies. If I don't I can go to Novell and get their enterprise product for as little as $350 (1 or 2 CPUs) and no more than $900 (up to 16 CPUs). Or I can roll my own server using a no-cost distribution.
Note something about these prices too--they are based on servers/server processors. There are no CALs or client limitations...so even if you decide that buying a commercial enterprise distro is worth it, your licensing costs are $1200/$900/$350...period. You can use your RedHat (or SuSE or whatever) server with a database to serve up, say, an accounting system for an enterprise with 1000 users. Required licensing is as follows:
SuSe + PostgreSQL: $900
RH + PostgreSQL: $1200
Windows 2003 Server + MSSQL 2005: $9000 *
* W2k3 standard ($1000) with external connector license ($2000) + 1 SQL 2005 standard processor license ($6000)
Note that if you want to use a multi-processor box the Microsoft solution gets even more expensive...with SuSE and RedHat the price is for systems that support multiprocessing up to 16-way...that's a savings of $7800 to $8100 in licensing for a single server. And enterprises have a lot of servers. Seems to me that it'd be worth looking at.
Then there are the intangables: There are more viruses released per day for windows than there have been for Linux during its entire existence. There are free (and Free) software tools often bundled with Linux distros that are extra cost for Windows. Remote and automated management of Linux boxes is much more powerful than for Windows. If you want terminal services it is no extra cost for Linux--it is an in-built capability of X, whereas you have to pay through the nose to get terminal services licensing for Windows. The cost advantages go on and on.
Slower than MySQL ? Don't have any benchmarks, but I always hear this.
News Flash: Linux has been used in "mission critical" applications in the enterprise for at least 8 years now. Anyone who thinks Linux is "almost ready" clearly doesn't know what they're talking about and is nearly a decade behind reality.
VS2005 is certaily a stellar development environment, I'll agree with you there, but IT people implement systems, they don't often do heavy developmet anymore. Linux does need a "VS2005 killer" though, so that developers are encouraged to expand on teh libraray of applicatios availabel for Linux.
I'd have to disagree wih you on the remote and automated management however. Yes, Windows has some great tools to handle automated deploymet of patches/upgrades/etc, but RedHat and Novell have done a great job there. Furhtermore you can do a superior job with large, remote backups using no-exra-cost toolsin Linux than you can with Windows backup solutions that cost thousands. Furthermore, the Windows command shell and batch files are pretty weak compared to what is available for Linux so you too often have to resort to using a cumbersome GUI to remotely administer machines. I suppose it is personal taste though, but I much prefer rattling off a script to plodding my way through some MMC snap-in, wading throughtrees and menus and such with my mouse.
Places like Pogo are going to need to improve their warranty and support policies if they want to compete against the big players. The person I replaced bought several boxes from Pogo. One had a DVD drive that croaked, so I submitted a warranty claim online. It took a phone call a couple of weeks later to actually get an acknowledgement. Then, weeks passed, and no replacement drive. They claim their vendor dropped the ball on that, so they were shipping one from stock. So it arrives, and they expect the defective one to be returned at my own cost.
Now, I can get a comparable Athlon 64 from HP these days for less money, but when something breaks, I submit an online request, have the part in hand the next day, and they include a prepaid label for return of the defective part.
Why do I need the extra cost and stress?