Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sun Offering Optimized AMP Stack On Solaris

Posted by kdawson on from the LAMP=~s/L/S/ dept.

tbray writes "This is your friendly local Sun corporate drone reporting that we're going to be building and optimizing and DTrace-ing and shipping and supporting the AMP part of LAMP (details here). I think that basically the whole tech industry, excepting Microsoft, is now at least partly in the AMP camp."

4 of 135 comments (clear)

  1. The job isn't finished yet, until all of...(NICE!) by linuxbaby · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Great quote from TFA:

    The job isn't finished yet, until all of Apache and MySQL and PostgreSQL and PHP and Python and and Ruby and Rails are in the package, all optimized for Solaris, all stuffed with DTrace probes, and all with developer and production support available. It won't be long.
  2. Postgres Migration by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wish there were a simple tool I could run that would analyze a LAMP install and migrate it to Postgres instead of MySQL.

    I don't want to get into a holy war about the relative merits: we already use Postgres, we will not support two database systems, we are not switching from Postgres to MySQL. MySQL might be good for others, but not for us.

    But we do get these LAMP apps that come bundled with MySQL. Usually they don't use any MySQL specific features that Postgres (and maybe moving some functions across the app/DB boundary) can't directly support. So I'd like to get a LAMP -> LAPP migrator that will automate the switch. Leaving optimizations for after the switch, to be performed by other (Postgres) tools or programmers/DBAs. The open source of these two DBs, and the open source of all these LAMP apps, should make migration between them accessible.

    I'm sure there are lots of people like me. Where's the tool that makes the open source as good for migrating among these programs as creating them from scratch?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  3. Re:Yawn.... by m0rph3us0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For us we doubled the performance on our db by switching from RHEL4 to Solaris 10. The support for Solaris 10 is less than for RHEL4

  4. Re:Yawn.... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A while back there were some interesting comparisons of SQL performance on Darwin/Mac OS X versus Linux, under controlled conditions on similar hardware

    Ah, but remember -- Sun can sell you a machine which goes well beyond the whole 'similar hardware'.

    If they can sell someone an optimized, supported, and enterprise-class piece of hardware which is basically turnkey, and can fill the job of being your web-facing front-end, there will be companies for whom this is a very good idea.

    What Sun can sell you is the higher end for which there is no way you could build it with a commodity PC. Enterprise customers have enterprise hardware needs, and enterprise mindsets. Being "PHB Compatible" is a valuable thing in business, cause if things go to shit, you have someone who can come in and make things go again.

    Sun isn't trying to get the hobbyist shop; they're targeting higher end companies with bigger budgets who want reliability.

    If for nothing else than they're going to support the AMP stack, I have to commend Sun on this decision. This can only be good for those parts of the stack, and it won't really hurt Linux in any way -- this is complementary. This will have the effect of giving PHBs an option which uses Apache, MySQL, and PHP/PostgressSQL (whichever it is). I don't see this as being a 'lose' for the OSS people.

    Why is Slashdot so pathologically opposed to someone buying a computer and operating system, even if it makes sense for their business goals?

    Cheers
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.