Slashdot Mirror
IBM's Newest Mainframe Is All Linux
dcblogs writes "IBM has released a new mainframe server that doesn't include its z/OS operating system. This Enterprise Linux Server line supports Red Hat or Suse. The system is packaged with mainframe management and virtualization tools. The minimum processor configuration uses two specialty mainframe processors designed for Linux. IBM wants to go after large multicore x86 Linux servers and believes the $212,000 entry price can do it."
I guess they need a blue penguin.
...Linux on the mainframe!
( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrFgRAcr0jg )
One that hath name thou can not otter
Hmmm... Captive Cloud Computing? Has a nice marketing ring to it. I better hurry and trademark that!
$212 sounds like a reasonable price for an x86 Linux server, at least as an entry level.
Just one question: What's a "000 entry price"?
At $212,000, a great stocking-stuffer for the kernel hacker who has everything.
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
There is a big difference between a mainframe and a high-end server. Why would someone buy a mainframe if they didn't need the reliability and special features of a mainframe? Aren't these really the selling points of the Z-series over the P-series, for example? Usually the P-series and I-series systems are also touted for virtualization, and tend to be less expensive. Can someone distinguish the big difference between these lines now? Traditionally, from what I remember, P-series was AIX, I-Series was AS/400, and Z-series was z/OS and other mainframe OS's. Of course, IBM has been offering Linux on all of them for quite awhile now.
Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
The sad fact is that there will be at least one beowulf cluster post even after that post I made^W^W...uh, I mean was made by not me posting anonymously because they were too impatient to log in.
Now maybe all the companies out there who are thinking of wasting money on cloud computing can just buy one of these, and basically have their own in-house cloud.
Private cloud is flavour of the month it seems. A recent (as in "last month") release from joint venture ACADIA (a Cisco+EMC+VMWare+Intel lash-up) shows that packaged private "Cloud" back end server offerings are at least seen as a way people will go.
I think it's smart packaging myself, four-cab VM building block, just add servers and away you go. And since you're just providing a VM environment, you're not limited in your underlying OS choices. Linux is a good way to go there.
~Although the ACADIA system is clearly superior to the IBM offering because (see above link) it can "accelerate customers' ability to increase business agility through greater IT infrastructure flexibility"./~ Gaaaahh!
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
What screensavers come with it, can I add my own?
If your using linux, why bother with vmware at all?
Just use openvz and get better performance and lower cost. Full virtualization is only worth bothering with if you are stuck running windows as well.
If your using linux, why bother with vmware at all?
It's not the environment itself, it's the support stuff. How to manage load balancing a few dozen or even a few hundred servers, what to do with the virtual images you end up with (lots of them. Dedup helps a lot). Server on-boarding VM utilities. Patch management. And do be careful with those DHCP servers, you don't want duplicate address tables.
It's not just running an OS on top of an OS any more. You gotta manage these virtual servers, and that's where people are willing to pay the extra money.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
but but but, will it run Windows?
Life is not for the lazy.
"Its minimum processor configuration are two specialty mainframe processors designed for Linux."
What the fuck kind of grammar is that?
The load balancing should be pretty easy to script, openvz does live-migrate.The rest seem pretty similar and KSM adds memory deduplication to the kernel so openvz will support that pretty soon.
To me 99% of this stuff seems to be for places that want to hire total dolts and pay somebody else to make it easy for the dolts.
Yes, please do hurry. Also, while you are at it - trademark "cloud seeding" (the process of giving out an eval server to get people to buy more for their captive cloud), "cloud burst" (what happens when your cloud runneth over), "every cloud has a silver lining" (profit!), "cloud cover" (your backup plan), and "cloud nines" (the number of 9's of reliability you have managed to achieve).
To me 99% of this stuff seems to be for places that want to hire total dolts and pay somebody else to make it easy for the dolts.
That's not entirely fair. Sometimes the smartest thing you can do is buy something that already works, not something you have to script to get to work. Boxes you can plug into place. The place for the scripting you're describing is in development. You write a script that works, is flexible and efficient - and then get someone in marketing to put a wrapper around it to convince the buyers it's industry practice. That's what they're doing, anyway.
As good as your solution may be (and I've worn those shoes before myself) you'll be outpointed by the buyers who want it all in a bag taped to the cabinet.
After it's all in place then scripting expertise is needed to keep things working when things need to be changed. Trust me, you don't want a dolt for a sysadmin. I'd rather hire a BOFH than do that (just remember to keep your own spare key).
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
In 8 years, I have had nothing but *excellent* support from IBM. Just sayin, is all...
Question is: Where can I find them? I wonder how MythTV with trans-coding shows and all the rest would run on them. Any ideas on where to find old p- or z- series mainframes?
You should get the IBM DS3200, I hear it's way better.
Its not what it is, its something else.
IBM sucks. I know, I work for them. If your standard is a help desk staffed by untrained idiots, server support coming from Indians who barely speak english and could care less about anything other than their ticket count, and a consistent effort to make every issue a money issue, then yes, you probably get "excellent" support. I came to IBM in an outsourcing agreement. Before the outsourcing, the IT staff cared about the environment we managed. We wanted things to be done right, and took pride in the work we did. Now, only a skeleton crew of the original employees remain and the rest have been replaced by offshore staff, all at the direction of IBM's upper management determined to put the company and their customers into the poor house while pocketing fat bonuses and exercising stock options funded by the blood of their employees.
Sam P thinks that offshoring is so wonderful, and offers his employees an opportunity to work in "developing" countries for the "prevailing local wage". If he thinks it's so great, then he should move his fat prick ass out of his comfy house(s) and live there himself. No one in the US would miss him. He could take his fudgepacker buddy Bob Moffat with him and they could steal from the locals to pass the time.
Now there will undoubtedly be several who respond that I'm just bitter. They will make comments that I'm just a spoiled American, upset that the cheap labor from other geographies is threatening my lifestyle. And to all of them, from the bottom of my heart, FUCK YOU.
You get what you pay for....
Um, in 5.5 months, you've had 15 emails? 5.5 months is about 24 weeks or 120 business days; what are you doing only sending email every week and a half?
I had an open software case with HP on an AlphaServer/TruCluster issue that lasted a little over a year. I think I sent over 200 email messages about that case (and there were other people involved as well). We had weekly conference call updates, as well as several meetings with various combinations of HP sales, support, engineers, and managers (many from out of state) in our office. Yeah, it sucked, but part of my job as system administrator is to stay on top of our vendors to make sure they are holding up their end of our support contracts. We aren't any big HP or AlphaServer customer (this was a cluster of two ES40s and represented 2/3 of our total installed base of Alphas, and we didn't have any other HP stuff at all), but we kept on them so they knew they had to deliver.
I wonder what the people pushing this terminology are smoking to prodcue their own private cloud.
Either that or it's well intentioned subversion to get those tricked by the "cloud" salesfolk back on track.
I see those Windows commercials, and I just want to say "Well I'm Ken Thompson, and UNIX was my idea."
I claim BS.
1. You're claiming you wouldn't buy another piece of "IBM server equipment" yet you're complaining about the lowest end disk drive array (really just a shelf) they make.
2. You have no idea what a DS300 is. You claim it's a Fibre SAN device. However, the DS300 is an iSCSI device with RJ45 GigE ports. The DS400 is fibrechannel attached.
You could have had that shelf RMA'd 10x by now. How about picking up the phone? You do have one of those don't you?
Try calling 1-800-IBM-FAST next time.
I attended the "Red Hat Virtual Experience" today; their offering seems to have a leg up on the ESX solution. Load balancing is only one of the features. Patch management can be accomplished through Red Hat's web interface, where you build templates and install companywide as desired. I'm getting ready to demo it on our blades to see how it compares. Have you taken a look at it?
You have no chance against Chinese, with their widely practiced cloud dispersion methods.
One that hath name thou can not otter
FUCK YOU TOO.
In the 80's, when India was a closed/socialist economy, all the developed countries were banging on our door (some directly, some through IMF, World Bank et al.,) to open up our markets. And the local industrialists were pressuring the government not to open up because they were afraid all the multi-nationals would come and put their protected businesses out of business. Finally, India had to do it out of desperation. Now Indian companies and peoples have learnt the game and found the niches where they can make money and now you guys bitch. Yeah, globalization was all good when it's just you make goods and your businesses shove goods on developing countries, but when they learn the game and beat you with their advantages, it's a bitch. It's a two-way street, dude! Learn to live with it, for you have no choice. If every country went back to their protectionist regimes, the american companies would not survive, for their markets are saturated and there is no growth. They depend on the developing countries' markets for growth.
I call BS. Perhaps incompetence on your part. 15+ emails? In 6 months? Yeah, that is incompetent. A sysadmin who has a serious problem and only sends 15 emails to the supplier in half a year deserves to be on his ass in the street, no severance.
BTW, the problem with your DS300 Fiber SAN is easy to identify. You are trying to use an iSCSI device as a Fiber SAN device. THAT WON'T WORK.
You sir are an idiot. This is IBM we are talking about here. It could be running any number of proprietary IBM OS's such as z/OS, aix, OS/400, z/VM, z/VSE, z/TPF, or MUSIC/SP.
Please never speak again.
Clouds and showers?
How about an IBM Eserver that encountered a warning on boot from the RAID array, not an error and wouldn't boot up until someone pressed a key...
on the console!
so either:
A: I keep my Eserver next to my iPod dock on my desk so I have easy access to press the any key when required.
B: I use Dell and have complete hardware based remote access.
It probably will, since OpenSolaris is ported to System z. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSolaris_for_System_z
- Henrik
- when the Shadows descend -
but when they learn the game and beat you with their advantages, it's a bitch. It's a two-way street, dude! Learn to live with it, for you have no choice. If every country went back to their protectionist regimes, the american companies would not survive, for their markets are saturated and there is no growth. They depend on the developing countries' markets for growth.
The problem is, they are not beating the US with advantages.. You see, I'm in the customer service game.. The problem with outsourcing things like customer service, is that customer service is about communicating.. You absolutely can not beat someone in the US at communicating with someone in the US.. I know, I have to listen to all the "thank god's" from customers when they get me instead of our overseas counterparts.. I really don't like hearing it much, because it almost sounds racist.. but it's mostly just venting of frustrations that they have had from previous experiences where they could not communicate well with someone.. The advantages of cheaper labor are lost when a customer has to call multiple times because they can not communicate well with the person trying to help them.. no matter how smart that person may be.. and as some companies have learned, there are customers who will switch to companies who have customer service that they can work with..
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
I have all the information I could ever need, right on my desktop
You be missed!
There are a number of factors which go into this consideration of Linux on the mainframe. I must admit it was really cool when I first learned of it, having had an MP3000 to myself at an IBM training facilty to learn how to bring up VM/ESA and Linux/390(2001). Then I realized a few things like:
1. Linux cannot take advantage of the advantages of channel-based disk i/o, because it uses Unix i/o approaches which can never be as efficient as the traditional mainframe-based approaches. No one has shown me any evidence that Linux does anything particularly intelligent in its channel program construction and management. Linux assures that IBM can happily sell lots of IFL or general purpose CPUs which are necessary to compensate for this inefficient use of
mainframe resources.
2. Managing workloads under zVM can be great and is extremely well refined, but this requires zVM-specific skills which supposedly no one wants to pay for.
3. For transaction-based work, it's hard to beat TPF/zTPF, but unfortunately that requires some real mainframe skill to implement. And regrettably, zTPF requires Linux and zOS because IBM refuses to convert the programs running on zOS to run on Linux instead. Since TPF/zTPF and zOS both involve onerous monthly licensing charges based on capacity, it's no wonder that TPF/zTPF languish in relative obscurity.
I did a lot of work on 370/VM and it was really a brilliant operation system... vastly ahead of its time... it created true virtual machines, with their own virtual hardware and even console/control panel. Within each VM you could run whatever (IBM or non-IBM) operating system you wanted...including another copy of VM to create more VMs... to about 10 levels deep. The implementation was flawless... and each VM was completely isolated. Othere OS have just started to catch up... but most (all?) current OSs don't virtualize the hardware as well.
Back in the hayday of IBM... the system were well documented and incredibly reliable.
I grew to love JCL... alas CICS always sucked.
I call bullshit as the DS300 is the old Adaptec storage array that used old fashioned SCSI with EXP400 expansion shelves. No fibre channel in sight. On that vintage of hardware you would have a DS400 which uses the same EXP400 expansion shelves but presents them as fibre chennel out the back. Still Adaptec rebadged storage.
I would add that we have in general had excellent support from IBM on hardware issues. We where not impressed with the firmware issues surrounding version 7.36.12 and 7.36.15 versions of the firmware for the various DS4000 arrays. I have also noted that they still have not fixed their firmware release processes as they shipped some drive firmware in the ESM 1.64 version that would efficiently brick your drives as it put standard firmware signatures on the drives, so then the arrays refused to talk to them :-)
However actual bust hardware they are very good.
You brought an eServer and are complaining about the lack of remote management!!!
You do realize that with Dell remote management is an optional extra, and there is a range of dirt cheap hardware that comes with nothing more than basic IPMI just like the eSeries does.
You want remote management you need to pay for it.
No, we are replying within 24 hours. They've sent a tech onsite once. Then they send an e-mail requesting some other piece of info which they "analyze" for 2 or 3 weeks till we poke them again.
Full virtualization is only worth bothering with if you are stuck running windows as well.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHH!!!! Oh wait, you were being serious. Oh well.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHH!!!!
Mod parent up. +1 Insightful.
Outsourcing customer service to another country is a bad idea. Language and cultural barriers make communication much more difficult, even when the help desk person is knowledgeable.
This applies in both directions. Trying to help someone when there is even a marginal cultural/language barrier can make both people feel like idiots. Fair enough when it's necessary (like tech to tech knowledge transfers), but if keeping customers is part of your business plan, it's probably a bad idea to implement it this way for the general help desk.
two specialty mainframe processors designed for Linux
Seriosly? That's just marketing FUD. They are not designed for Linux, they just have some features deactivated so that z/OS can't run on them, so that they "could sell them cheaper".
Linux assures that IBM can happily sell lots of IFL or general purpose CPUs which are necessary to compensate for this inefficient use of
mainframe resources.
Oh, and Java! They are very happy that their customers convert their mainframe stuff to be mostly Java, because it's so inefficient and causing them to buy more processing power from IBM!
They depend on the developing countries' markets for growth.
No, they depend on developing countries for cheap-ass workers that they treat like slaves whilst reducing relatively expensive workers in the home country at the expense of quality of work.
(not that the developing countries workers couldn't do the work properly, just that the work demanded of them is designed to be cheap and correspondingly focused on cost, not quality)
"Linux cannot take advantage of the advantages of channel-based disk i/o, because it uses Unix i/o approaches which can never be as efficient as the traditional mainframe-based approaches"
That's interesting, tell us more about the differences between Unix and 'mainframe-based' disk I/O.
Now none of you can complain that Apple is expensive. Linux/IBM has all of you beat!
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Look, IBM has been a great international evil since forever. They made the machines that managed the concentration camps, and the service contract was paid straight to Armonk. IBM's stance has been "that was IBM Germany, it was someone else man!" Anyone who can seriously say that can believe anything.
I went to work for Tivoli right after they had been acquired and had the opportunity to watch a bought-out company lose its soul. When you called Tivoli you used to get someone with a brain on the first try, now they have a level 1 support that can't spell "usage" (became "yowzij") and which enters cases about problems with Dragon Drop.
IBM can crush the goodness out of anything.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Agreed. IBM sucks. Their support guys are script readers who ask for increasingly obscure logs and system settings, when you can demonstrate on day 1 of the bug report that there's a simple application bug.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
The System z hardware is no more EBCDIC than you are. z/Linux uses ASCII for messages, commands, and utilities, just as z/OS uses EBCDIC. The z/Linux choices include ports of RedHat and Suse. The port does not include translating these to EBCDIC.
Now, the old native Unix for z/OS, Unix System Services, *was* an EBCDIC Unix. Nothing ever said Unix had to be based on ASCII. Porting programs to USS was a challenge because too many programs made assumptions about the binary value of characters. Usually the fixes were simple, but sometimes the defects were hard to find. But if an assumption was made about the collating sequence, the problem was harder.
Sorry, typo. It's a DS400. And I'll post pictures if you prefer.
1. It's a DS400. The internals are the same as the DS300, the controller card is just different. Wouldn't be the first typo.
2. It's used as offline storage for our databases, not as a production system. It isn't a serious problem, but thank you for classifying my issues for me. I'm fully capable of determining the difference between a serious issue and a minor inconvenience. At the same time, any hardware that has been broken for 6 months after first notifying the vendor, regardless of the criticality of the situation is ridiculous.
3. 15+ E-mails is what we've received from IBM over the past 6 months, not the other way around. I assure you that we've been sending e-mails daily and we were calling till they stopped answering.
4. I'm not the primary sysadmin working on this case, so I'm not even the one involved with IBM. I'm just copied on the e-mails and amazed by the ridiculousness of it all, especially compared to my experiences with HP and Dell support.
And the whole process has been full of ridiculousness. They'd send a tech who found both controllers unresponsive. The tech rebooted the SAN and sent the diagnostics to IBM. IBM replied a week later saying "It looks like the SAN was rebooted before the tech got there, you need to start over". So the SAN freezes again, they want to send a tech back out to get the logs, to which we point out that we've already TRIED that and the whole process repeats.
Make sure you get the "Norwegian Cloud" as well(entire datacenter explodes in an impressive display of shiny colors).
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Anybody used linux on a mainframe? I skimmed the comments but didn't see anyone mention they used one. I have it works but it has its issues...big issues. Anybody ever seen prices for memory on a mainframe. Big bucks. I'm sure its come down since then but in the last 2 years I heard them talking here at work about $10,000 for 1 Gb and it comes in 8 Gb "books". Then try to get your mind around z/VM RAM disks for swap (my z/Series guy says this is how you have to do it). Mainframe dasd (thats disk to the rest of us) is insanely expensive. Plus at least for us when you convert it in z/VM and present it to linux a mod27 (27 Gb mainframe volume) turns into a little over 23 Gb under LVM. Add that do all of the prepackaged executables you use have to be packaged for z/series hardware. Meaning ix/86 executables don't run on linux on Z the same way they won't run on linux on Power (p or i series)
1. If they can't support the low end stuff, wouldn't I be insane to plop down a quarter of a million dollars on something from them?
2. As I said, it was a typo. I'm a human and 3 and 4 are right next to each other on the keyboard. Deal with it.
So the SAN freezes again, they want to send a tech back out to get the logs, to which we point out that we've already TRIED that and the whole process repeats.
Somebody isn't getting an answer high enough up the foodchain. Try going through your sales rep. His future commissions are at stake and he has the right phone numbers.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I still think of it as System 38, but I figure there aren't all that many who do. With the transition from the IMPI to the Power hardware, it's really a different beast from the old System 38. Still, the MI is there, and that's what I came to know and love. I mean, honestly, create dataspace index as an instruction? And my personal favorite, copy bytes with overlap left adjusted with pad. Now that's an instruction.
For a lot less money they could do the same thing with open systems hardware and VMWare.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
"It's a different kind of world. We need a different kind of software ..."
I've got it! LCARS running on a Galaxy Class starship computer core.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
With the introduction of XA architecture in the late 80's, IBM moved some of the virtualization technology down into the hardware, they created a new instruction, SIE - Start Interpretive Execution that could tap into this facility. This facility ended up being the heart of both LPARs and VM/XA (which grew into current z/VM). Conceptually the SIE instruction, or the LPAR facility saves the current processor context, and starts a new context. The "guest" system (or the LPAR) now runs in this new context until some condition has been met (e.g. certain timer pops, certain state changes, etc, as defined by the meta-system (z/VM or the base system managing the LPARs). The movement of this function down into hardware was a logical extension of what used to be called hardware VM assists in pre-XA days.
Basically the base hardware provides LPARs (in fact for quite some time IBM mainframes can only run in LPAR mode, even if one has only one system image). LPARs allow sharing of the physical processors, sharing of physical I/O devices, and partitioning of physical memory. With an LPAR you cannot exceed the physical resources available, meaning that you cannot define an LPAR image with more processors then are physically available, or give an LPAR image more memory then is physically available. This is where z/VM comes in.
z/VM provides the ability to virtualize the physical resources. You can define a VM guest with more memory then is physically available, or more processors then are physically available. In addition z/VM can provide virtualized I/O devices, or provide more fine grained partitioning of physical devices (e.g. carving a disk volume into a collecting of smaller volumes in what is called mini-disks -- which are not the same as a disk partition).
I think Suse Studio has the advantage here, which is about the only thingg Novell has an advantage on.
I'd have a talking-to with the sysadmin in charge. He apparently doesn't know how to run things up the pole, which is a crucial qualification for a sysadmin. As someone else said - get in touch with your sales rep, he knows what to do.
I have never had these kinds of problems with IBM.
Compete all you want. But do it on a level playing field. The reason your wages are so low is because the cost of living is so low. And why is that? Because you have no protections for the poorest among you and you take advantage of them for even cheaper labor. YOU'RE EXPLOITING YOUR OWN PEOPLE. First, create a society where the most vulnerable, like children and the poor have some protections. Child labor laws, minimum wages. You're not competing. You're not doing a better job. You're killing your own people, destroying the environment, and generally being poor citizens of the world.
Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
Please mention what gain full virtualization has over a system like openvz.
"1. If they can't support the low end stuff, wouldn't I be insane to plop down a quarter of a million dollars on something from them?"
That's like saying you paid Eliot Spitzer's escort $50 and the quality of the blowjob wasn't what you'd expect.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
So we get Lotus Domino instead?! Somehow that doesn't seem... right.
That is all.
$212,000 could buy you a not-insignificant quantity of commodity x86 hardware, and Ubuntu Server (probably not uniquely among server distros) already includes software (in the case of the one with Ubuntu Server, API-compatible with Amazone EC2) to run your own cloud.
No, it's more like buying a 3.18ti BMW and having the dealer treat you like scum, then wonder why you aren't buying an M5.
It can cut both ways, though ... Sometimes, an in-house solution is EXACTLY what a company needs.
Agree, absolutely. Can you imagine how Google would have faired if they tried to run their search off MySQL or SQL Server instead of Bigtables? We'd still be typing in guessed URL's.
I would characterise the origin of the problem you describe as having two foci: (a) Architect not up to the job, and (b) Architecture chosen on the golf course.
I would no sooner use a business leader to choose a large system architecture than I would select me to design a chart of accounts. Dentists shouldn't do their own plumbing, and plumbers shouldn't do their own dentistry.
I feel your sorrow.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
I attended the "Red Hat Virtual Experience" today; their offering seems to have a leg up on the ESX solution. Load balancing is only one of the features. Patch management can be accomplished through Red Hat's web interface, where you build templates and install companywide as desired. I'm getting ready to demo it on our blades to see how it compares. Have you taken a look at it?
Links please?
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
I wonder what the people pushing this terminology are smoking to prodcue their own private cloud.
Either that or it's well intentioned subversion to get those tricked by the "cloud" salesfolk back on track.
The cloud salesfolk are afraid of not having a product that can support the Google Chrome OS. Yes, it's all marketing and positioning. In the end, however, we'll end up with nice modular and scalable four-cabinet virtualisation platforms we can buy and install thence to load our own virtual servers network on. I don't care if they market it as a "cloud" or a "puff pastry" platform. We win.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Yea, the problems of "shareholder value" and "agency theory", which are fundamentally flawed. And yes it killed GN. I plan to post another slashdot submission with more info soon. In the meantime, look at my Firehose for some links.
The actual link we used for the conference won't help you much without a login, this was a registration-required event. The agenda is here: http://www-2.virtualevents365.com/rhexp/agenda.php . The best public area is probably http://www.redhat.com/rhev/ .
PDF/PPT downloadables were provided during the all-day session and supposedly all the A/V content (the actual recordings / transcripts) will be available on the RedHat site for 3 months after they are posted... as with all interactive presentations there was a lot discussed that wasn't on the slideshow.
I found a thread about it here in another Slashdot article: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1146813&cid=27050245 One reply suggests that changes to the tax system may to be blame.
Many European countries have the same reservations about the US; how can you protect the vulnerable poor without universal healthcare? How can you protect the environment whilst flouting Kyoto? The poverty which exists in areas of the US may be nothing in comparison with India, but is still considered barbaric by most of Europe. Which 'level playing field' would you like?
ALL labour is 'exploited'; that's how Capitalism works. It doesn't need to be put in such loaded terms, but the fact is that Capitalism cannot exist without the appropriation of surplus value created by labour - if you want Capitalism, you have to put up with 'exploitation'. It seems to me that 'competing', in a purely business sense, is exactly what India is doing.
[ ]Half Empty [ ]Half Full [x]Twice as big as it needs to be
That was highly useful, my thanks. I sit surrounded by DC planners, and I've sent that link around.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Who said I bought an Eserver ?
One was thrust upon me and the fact that they can't write a decent server BIOS has nothing to do with hardware remote management, although the fact that it is one of the main reasons to buy a server box in the first place, the investment in remote management is worth it, so when I get to choose the server, its Dell with the RAC installed.
Basically, if you can't afford a hardware RAC, you would be better off configuring a good, well ventilated desktop for remote access than buying an Eserver which is going to cost you at least twice that, because you have to babysit the darn thing.
SVC 202.
CAmbridge.
It's R13 for you, my friend. Go drink your Socrates' Pinoqachole
-
Extracting sunbeams from
Seconded. But you should see the zSeries. TCP checksum and CPU time instruction. Fused multiply add/sub. Not bad, eh?
I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
Your capitalisation and punctuation suck.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
It can cut both ways, though. I work for a Very Large Nonprofit that has been trying to implement a software system , and it's been a fiasco of FAA/IRS proportions. The root cause is a decision made at the very beginning to go with COTS software.
Am I the only person thinking "Peoplesoft" here?
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Please mention what gain full virtualization has over a system like openvz.
Your question is a non-sequitur. I'm not laughing at the proposition that openvz is better than full virtualization. THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU SAID IN THE POST I REPLIED TO
This is what you said:
Full virtualization is only worth bothering with if you are stuck running windows as well.
And that makes no sense. For starters, OpenVZ is limited now to having the guest and host OSes to be Linux (that might change in the future mind you.) But for problems that exist today, you need shit that run the shit you need to run today
So, please, tell me, how does OpenVZ help me if I have to support NetWare? How about supporting vm images of DOS for embedded devices? Solaris?
Notice that none of these real-scenarios scenarios fit into this "stuck in Windows". And even if all you need is Linux as the OS, there are still shops out there that WILL. NOT. USE. OpenVZ. Period.
Stupid? Yes. Reality? Yes,too. We get paid to get things done within the constrains in which we operate. You don't quit a job and burn bridges because they don't use every single piece of software that is your predilection. You don't stop being a problem solving professional because of that.
You suck it up and you just make it work because, in the end, it's not that bothersome or fatal to our oh-not-so-fragile(really) e-gos.
Get-Paycheck <--> Get-It-Working ... even if it means to get it working with things you know are not necessarily the best technical alternatives. That's the difference between the professional and the fanboy. The professional makes a workable choice given constrains as opposed to dramatizing and evangelizing the search for the technical alternative of all times.
So that's why a lot of people "bother with vm even if they are just using Linux." Anyone with a modicum of work experience in a variety of work environments - good and bad - know this.
I plan to post another slashdot submission with more info soon.
Finally it is ready: http://slashdot.org/submission/1138906/The-problem-of-shareholder-value-and-agency-theory