Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

CowboyNeal Reviews Oracle Linux

Posted by samzenpus on from the read-all-about-it dept.

CowboyNeal writes "Last week, Oracle announced that they were making Oracle Linux available free of charge, and also provided a script that makes switching to Oracle Linux nearly painless for existing CentOS users. What makes Oracle Linux unique, and why would anyone want to use it? Read on to find out, as I delve into what Oracle Linux has to offer."

What is Oracle Linux?

On its face, Oracle Linux feels like just another Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) derivative. It uses anaconda for an installer. It uses yum for handling packages. Configuration is handled just like RHEL, CentOS, or Scientific Linux. To be honest, the reasons why anyone would switch to Oracle Linux aren't immediately apparent after installing. It feels like nearly any other Linux with the Oracle name bolted on. Under the hood, however, are some rather compelling features.

The Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel

I have to start off with saying that I hate the name "Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel." I've seen enough crazy stuff in my time, to know that no software is truly unbreakable. It might be pretty good, but unbreakable is like calling the Titanic unsinkable. Given a poor enough captain, or in this case, an administrator, I don't have any doubts that the kernel could be broken in at least some fashion. However, I suppose that "Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel" sounds a lot better than the "Pretty-dang-tootin'-robust Enterprise Kernel," and with a target like enterprise customers, terms like "Pretty-dang-tootin'" just won't get stuffy execs to authorize using Oracle Linux.

With that off my chest, let's see what the Unbreakable Linux Kernel does have to offer. Oracle has added a number of their own enhancements into a Linux 2.6 kernel. These include networking optimizations, NUMA optimizations, and enhancements for OCFS2, asynchronous I/O, SSD disk access, OLTP, and more. They clearly work pretty well, as back in March, Oracle submitted a TPC-C benchmark for a Sun Fire server that was the fastest x64-based non-clustered system.

Ksplice: Update Your Kernel Without Rebooting

Ksplice was acquired by Oracle roughly a year ago, and as a result is married to Oracle Linux rather nicely. Ksplice is the holy grail for any administrator who is obsessed with uptime. It gives you the ability to update your kernel, with no downtime necessary. This is by far the best reason to use Oracle Linux, but it also comes at a steep price. While support for Ksplice is present in the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel, it does nothing without the Ksplice Uptrack service enabled.

How does one get Ksplice Uptrack? It's only included with an Oracle premier support contract. While Oracle is quick to note that it costs less than a similar-tier RHEL support contract, it's also still more than most people would want to pay for just reboot-less kernel updates. Sure, there's also actual support included in the contract, but the lack of an ala carte option for just Ksplice Uptrack doesn't make a premier support contract any easier to swallow.

I should note here, that regular package updates via yum, and regular kernel updates via yum, are still totally free. If you don't mind rebooting, Ksplice isn't a must-have. If Oracle wanted to attract more customers, an ala carte option for Ksplice Uptrack would be a step in the right direction. If they wanted to really build some good will with the Linux community, they'd make Ksplice Uptrack free for everyone. I know it may sound weird to mention Oracle and good will together, but I'd never thought I'd see Oracle and "free" mentioned together either. As it is, it feels like Uptrack is being used as the bait for a support contract, when the support contract should really be able to stand on its own.

DTrace: Debugging and Troubleshooting in Real Time

To be fair, the DTrace modules can be plugged into a lot of Linux kernels already out there, but Oracle Linux has done the leg work for their users. Maybe you're not doing the sort of development that requires DTrace, but it's still something handy to have in the toolbox when something breaks. It's also a handy way to profile already running processes at any moment, with little to no impact on performance when tracing a process. Oracle maintains a long list of DTrace resources on their OpenSolaris site.

Should I give this a look?

If you're already perfectly happy with your RHEL or CentOS Linux install, Oracle Linux is a hard sell, even at the price of free. After toying about with the system, I'd say it's at least worth a hard look. As it is, you get the benefits of CentOS or Scientific Linux, with Oracle's own stuff bolted on, and their enhancements, even minus Ksplice, make a compelling argument to use Oracle Linux. If you are setting up a machine to use Oracle's database software, Oracle Linux is the best choice, since it's been designed to support Oracle DB, and is the same Linux that Oracle uses in-house. While Oracle's premier support contract is cheaper than the RHEL alternative, the actual cost of switching from RHEL to Oracle in a given case may not be. While this release is a good first step for Oracle, more options, like free Ksplice Uptrack, or even a Ksplice Uptrack subscription, would make it an easier sell.

If you'd like to give Oracle Linux a try, without having to jump through a lot of hoops, the Oracle Linux Wiki has a list of download sites.

14 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. Oracle not worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, after Oracle tries to sue the planet for their most precious IP, I really want to use their products. No thanks. The fight with The Google showed their true colors. http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=2012053015590290

    As an product engineer for my company, I need to look out for sue-happy companies. This is one of them. Buh-bye.

    1. Re:Oracle not worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For all we know, Oracle is tweaking a 2004 kernel from the SuSE 9.1 days. And we don't know, because it was closed source until this announcement.

      How can Oracle keep a Linux kernel closed source while distributing it?

    2. Re:Oracle not worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OLE is being pushed as a competitor with RHEL. Despite being virtually identical in every meaningful way, Oracle makes wild claims of superiority, then certifies its products on only its own derivative OS. These are dirty, underhanded tricks, and anyone who doesn't understand that they will fleece their customers once they obtain lock-in via proprietary modifications is too naive to be making purchasing decisions and/or lacks sufficient experience with Oracle products.

      Satisfied? How much are they paying you to white-knight their product?

    3. Re:Oracle not worth it by Teckla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So, as predicted, my comment gets moderated downwards (at least at the time I'm posting this), and all of the comments trashing Oracle have been moderated up.

      ...

      Geez, at least try to make a technical comment about why Oracle's Linux is a poor choice. Ad hominen attacks may make you feel good, but it doesn't add anything to the discussion on the merits of Oracle Linux.

      Maybe you got modded down because you said this:

      Once you grow up and get into the real world...

      And this:

      So, if you're a screaming freetard...

      Those sure look like ad hominem attacks to me. Oh, but look, they were coming from you. So it's okay for you to ad hominem other people, but it's not okay for them to ad hominem you?

      You, bungo, are one of the reasons Slashdot is becoming a less cool place. Your unnecessary harsh and insulting post gets 5, Insightful, and it's filled insults and flamebait. Shame on you.

  2. Really? by raydobbs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh yeah, I want to run right out there and do business with a company that seems to be in the business of suing people over every little thing - like saying their database server products suck... or that you found a way to make money with one of their products they didn't think of... or that you use one of their products in a way they didn't think of themselves and charge you outrageous fees for...

    If I had wanted that, I would have bought copious amounts of SCO products to keep Daryl McBride employed. Let me put it more simply to you, for those at Oracle who might care:

    I'd rather eat razor sharp ground glass than use your products.

    1. Re:Really? by raydobbs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps they are - and your right - I don't spend millions on software, so I would not be a threat to Oracle in their 'pond' to use your term. The point I was trying to make is that I am not about to set out and use their product FOR FREE that would put me into bed with them. Their products are a mess, their customer service is awful (I've worked for a few Oracle customers - they ALWAYS wished they had never entered into the agreement to use their gear - ALWAYS), and their corporate culture is nasty.

      Sure, I could rant about Microsoft too - but they aren't the authors of this software, or even a subject of this article - so why should I?

  3. Missing question...... by mormop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The only question I really wanted to hear answered is "Do you guarantee that once I've converted all of my servers to your free product, it will still be available further down the line? Or, to put it another way, am I likely to end up having to pay for the binary rpms or do a full re-install of CentOS later because you've changed the licencing and started issuing source rpms only"?

    --
    Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    1. Re:Missing question...... by bungo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, they do guarantee. It's no secret, the product lifecycle is on their support website.

      Also, what Oracle have put together is all open sourced, so you're free to fork it if you want.

      --
      "The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
  4. Fuck Oracle by jon3k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I will do anything possible to not use their products and stop anyone I know from using them. Fuck Oracle.

  5. Re:Oracle? No thanks. by Daetrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the Oracle that writes poorly implemented and poorly documented installers for their weirdly designed (and poorly documented) database software? Still not interested.

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  6. I'm Interested! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm interested! Wait a second ... *shuffles around in his desk drawer and pulls up an empty bottle of KY Jelly* ... awww, never mind :(

    Suddenly, a wild Oracle appears!

  7. Solaris by feezly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After what they did with Solaris I would not trust them keep yum updates available with a support contract.

  8. Fuck em by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While support for Ksplice is present in the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel, it does nothing without the Ksplice Uptrack service enabled.

    Any software company that locks on-disk, local software to an ongoing support contract can go fuck themselves. Ksplice should be part of the kernel proper; Oracle are holding back progress, plain and simple.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  9. Nothing against Oracle... by roc97007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Got nothing in particular against Oracle. We use their database products. But RHEL and Suse both being established, robust distributions that are more than good enough, there's really no compelling reason to switch. Combine that with an inherent (but not absolutely deal-killing) distrust of Oracle's business practices, and we'll just stay where we are, thanks.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.