CowboyNeal Reviews Oracle Linux

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.

Comments

Unsinkable Ship

[kdougherty]

Just don't navigate this kernel into any icebergs.

Re:Unsinkable Ship

[Anonymous Coward]

Just don't navigate this kernel into any icebergs.

I'm waiting for the Linux Malware called "Iceburg" - or malware that targets Oracle Linux specifically.

Oracle not worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Teresita]

Oracle tweaked a 2.6 kernel? Whoop de doo, Linux Mint 13 ships with 3.2, which is at least starting from a 2.6.39 baseline. 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.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:Oracle not worth it

[DuckDodgers]

I can only speak for myself, but I work at a small company that has to be pretty careful with the IT budget. We've had plenty of experiences with a useful piece of commercial software that was critical or nearly critical to our operations suddenly doubling in price. We've also had experiences where we brought a bug to the attention of the vendor and were asked to pay a premium support fee for them to fix it.

The worst was Crystal Reports. We used one of their products that cost $650 per license in 2004 and was over $15,000 for an equivalent license in 2009.

I have friends and relatives that work with Oracle and they're generally very pleased with their products. I respect that. But I'm not going to advocate using Oracle unless my employer has enough cash that they can swallow doubling of their proprietary software licensing costs without taking more than a few percent off their annual profits. Fortune 1000 companies are in that position, but the bulk of the economy is not.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[jedidiah]

Who needs to run a non-free version of Linux?

People who buy expensive commercial software, that's who.

If you are already running the megabuck database, a few more bucks for RHEL or SLES is really not a big deal.

If you aren't already giving Oracle a big pile of money EVERY YEAR, then their version of Linux is pretty irrelevant.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[jedidiah]

Are you kidding? Oracle loves to spout rhetoric about how they have made their product so automated that you don't need a DBA anymore. Oracle also sells outsourcing services.

So you are wrong. Oracle is actively trying to outsource your DBA job to India.

Clearly you don't know Oracle.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[bigredradio]

Considering you have a pretty low slashdot id (means you have probably seen a thing or two) AND created a well-constructed, well-thought-out argument, you are no longer the slashdot target market.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[jedidiah]

> So, what does this have to do with using Oracle Linux?

Ask the guy who actually brought it up.

>
> Nothing..... you just want to flame since you probably make you think it makes you look cool. It doesn't.

I just set the record straight. Stop swimming in the kool-aid.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I can see that your experience with "./" is extensive. It's almost as impressive as your familiarity with logical fallacies.

Despite your appeal to authority, you are not the only one with applicable experience: I have been a Unix admin in the Fortune 500 world for nearly 20 years, currently assigned as Senior SA to one of the largest Oracle databases in the world, and am currently supporting an initiative to convert our entire production environment from HPUX to RHEL. The customer in question is insisting on RHEL 5 specifically because Oracle has withheld certification from RHEL 6, which, again, is virtually identical to the Oracle product in every meaningful way. I happen to know what the fuck I'm talking about.

I have no great beef with Oracle. They are simply in the process /right now/ of making my life a living hell over /this very issue/. You want to paint everyone who is trash-talking Oracle as some kind of hater, fine... but if that's the case, then you're an unabashed fanboi, and you /deserve/ to be downvoted.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

My info is out of date. As of April, when the documents for this project were signed, over my objections, that certification was approved for OLE only. I apologize for making a false statement on the point of current certification. The rest of my objections stand: that was a dirty and underhanded tactic to secure support contracts and further the process of lock-in that I'm already having to deal with on a daily basis, and there is not a meaningful enough difference between the products for there to have ever been any kind of lag.

I suspect we'll be restarting the entire planning process soon, which only shifts my rage from one target to another. Yay.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[bobaferret]

There is no technical reason why you shouldn't use OLE over SL/CENT/RHEL. This is all about their sun acquisition. let me have time for my tea leaves to settle to the bottom of my glass here.... Here's what I see. Oracle buys aligning sun micro systems who got their hat handed to them by Linux, but not just by Linux, but by Redhat . Redhat is the largest kernel contributor by far. This implies that the pay the most kernel developers. Redhat is funded by enterprise customers by and large. Not small shops who only need CentOS, but by the Shops that are more than willing to use Orcale DBs. Lets just consider for a moment that Oracle managed to switch everyone using oracle from RHEL to OEL. What kind of impact would that have on RHEL? Enough to put a dent into it? Enough to put RHEL out of business? Or enough to keep them from really throwing their support at the kernel? I don't know. But in the long run I think Oracle see Linux as the enemy, and their going to try and take it down by going after Redhat. I think Oracle is a much bigger threat to Linux than MS ever was, because Oracle is going to target Linux in the enterprise space, not the desktop. Do I think it will actually work? No. But do I think this is their plan? yes. I think Redhat could stop this amazingly quickly, by simply offering RHEL for free w/o a support contract. But they stopped that for a reason I can't remember long ago. Hell Redhat could just write their own damn script to port Cent over to RHEL. Perhaps push a fresher kernel choice out more often as well. So to recap, don't use OLE, because they don't actually LIKE Liniux, and will do everything they can to hurt it.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Wolfrider]

--Eh? What u say?

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Teckla]

Whining and complaining about Oracle's software just makes you look like a child.

Do you know what else makes someone look like a child? This:

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

And this:

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

You, sir, simply don't deserve your current 5, Insightful moderation.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Teckla]

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.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

wahwahwah. Do you realize that the post the first whiner is complaining was "modded to hell" is now at +5? If people like yourself and that whiner are the remaining nugget of "old slashdot," then good riddance.

Re:Oracle not worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

I posted without thinking

Chill dude, this is Slashtwat, you still be fly!

Re:Oracle not worth it

[rhyder128k]

That's an error in the article. It's a 3.x derived kernel but it reports as 2.6.x for compatibility reasons. Even "uname -a" shows it as 2.6.x. Just reviewed it for one of the mags.

In a nutshell, the kernel enhancements offer some improved performance on massive hardware, such as the stuff that Oracle is selling. The appeal of the distro is a business one. Server admins like the idea of something that has been tested and certified by Oracle from the hardware to the kernel, all the way up to OracleDB. Other than that, the userland aims to be completely the same as RHEL beyond some cosmetic changes. Basically, a business has to weigh up the total cost, and it seems to be quite competitive with RHEL. For people who aren't going to pay for the service contract or hobbyists , Centos is a better bet.

Oracle?

[rrohbeck]

Can you spell L-O-C-K-I-N?

Re:Oracle?

[swan5566]

It's released under GPL. There's no "promise" that this will stay open, but then suddenly not be. *cough*java*cough*

Re:Oracle?

[PRMan]

O-R-A-C-L-E?

Oracle? No thanks.

[miltonw]

This is the Oracle that tried to kill Android? Then I'm not interested. Thanks.

dtrace

[Anonymous Coward]

http://dtrace.org/blogs/ahl/2011/10/10/oel-this-is-not-dtrace/
http://dtrace.org/blogs/ahl/2012/02/23/dtrace-oel-update/
Has Cowboyneal tried it?

Really?

[raydobbs]

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.

Re:Really?

[raydobbs]

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?

Missing question......

[mormop]

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"?

Re:Missing question......

[bungo]

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.

Re:"It's significantly cheaper than RHEL support"

[Anonymous Coward]

As with many salesperson-driven firms, the price varies A LOT from customer to customer.

Fuck Oracle

[jon3k]

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

Re:Oracle? No thanks.

[Daetrin]

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

Re:Faster updates

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

Who said anything about being an administrator? These are development machines for developers. Once things disappear off into production land, I let those people sort out what they want to run out in public and I know that our code will continue to work.

Best,

I'm Interested!

[Anonymous Coward]

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!

Oracle sucks

[Alien Being]

They make everything more difficult than it should be. They've given me headaches every time I've had to deal with them over the last 20 years. Pre-sales support, installation, bug research/reporting/resolution are all a royal pain. If you're in the process of buying Oracle software and they try to push *their* Linux on you, push back. Ask them why they are unable/unwilling to support industry standard distributions.

Re:Oracle sucks

[scubamage]

I will agree with that. I loved being able to get Sun support on the line when we had issues with our T5220's, and even our old SunFires. They worked quick, knew their stuff, and were, in general, awesome to work with. The last time we had an outage though, the problem was simple enough - the box had lost power, and when it was plugged back in openboot was set to autoboot? = false. So, it just sat there. Our operations team contacted oracle for support since most of them aren't very familiar with Sun. They were even more confused when they hopped on using a term server and saw iLOM's "Linux Kernel" prompts going by. The oracle support representative had no idea what they were talking about. By the time they got me on the horn, they had already been working with Oracle for about 3 hours. I had it fixed in 5 minutes (4 of which were trying to hunt down someone who had an RSA Keyfob I could use to log in to the term server). Considering the support money we give oracle, that was completely unacceptable. Sadly, I'm not the only one whose had this experience here - everything seems to have gone down hill since Oracle bought Sun.

Re:Oracle sucks

[SgtChaireBourne]

Speaking of making things more difficult than they should be, the ISO images for installation are not readily available for download. There is a heinous registration form but no promise of the ISOs even if you fill in the form (with either fake data or real). If Oracle is going to be serious about establishing a distro, it has got to be available at all the usual download sites along site CentOS, Debian and the other established distros.

What about the "killer app"

[bigredradio]

For those who are still waiting for the latest Oracle DB to be certified with RHEL 6, this appears to be one more reason to switch. Giving away an OracleDB certified OS seems like a pretty good ploy on their part. Then choke out Red Hat.

Not going to get any karma points for this move, but I see what they've done here.

Re:What about the "killer app"

[gbjbaanb]

yeah, it makes a lot of sense. There's nothing wrong with another supported Linux distro in the datacentre, and all those companies that require supported stuff can have Linux running their favourite DB (Oracle DB is good to be fair) and not install it on Windows like has been happening a lot. If they say "Linux is the preferred (or best) option" then Microsoft-only customers will start to get over their obsession and look at this alternative, and hopefully be pleasantly surprised.

As for paid-for ksplice updates, this is what companies do. Its fair enough. If you want free, then live with a quick reboot when you update the kernel - its not that big a deal. I'd like to see dtrace better installed for non-Oracle boxes though, but that's the way it goes.

I don't think of this as competing with RedHat, this is competing with Microsoft, trying to get Oracle delivered with their own OS makes things cheaper for Oracle's support teams, and makes Oracle a little bit more cost effective (which they need when Microsoft practically gives their DB away if you buy their OS)

Solaris

[feezly]

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

Fuck em

[TheSpoom]

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.

Re:Fuck em

[X0563511]

your comment: plus over nine thousand.

Fuckers. Oracle: ruining everything they touch, in one way or another.

RHEL Admin

[scubamage]

Hey all, RHEL admin here. Honestly the only part of this that would be really beneficial for my company would be ksplice. I just can't figure out why the upstream service is required. You need to phone home to upgrade your kernel? Can someone explain this to me?

No Way

[assertation]

I'm a Java Developer. I've had the displeasure of being forced into contact with Oracle after they borged Java and several other technologies I use.

Their documentation is almost deliberately terrible - perhaps to sell support and classes. They are very difficult to communicate with.

They have very little regard for users and developers.

Their help forums fun on bad technology that is very old that even someone putting up a personal web site would be ashamed to use.

Nothing against Oracle...

[roc97007]

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.

ksplice *is* part of the kernel proper

[Chirs]

I have used ksplice, back when it was an experimental project before Oracle bought it.

The core ksplice code is part of the kernel. The issue is that in order to actually create the updates, you need to build fixes against the running code (like building a kernel module), then you need to have a developer go over the fixes and make sure that the automated tools didn't miss anything (and if they did then fix things up). Also, there are some cases that the automated tools can't handle in which case the developer has to write the fix from scratch.

Nothing is stopping you from creating your own fixes, but if you want their stream of known-good fixes then you'll need to subscribe to the support contract.

need to phone home to get the "patches"

[Chirs]

The core ksplice code is part of the kernel. The issue is that in order to actually create the updates, you need to build fixes against the running code (like building a kernel module), then you need to have a developer go over the fixes and make sure that the automated tools didn't miss anything (and if they did then fix things up). Also, there are some cases that the automated tools can't handle in which case the developer has to write the fix from scratch.

Nothing is stopping you from creating your own fixes, but if you want their stream of known-good fixes then you'll need to subscribe to the support contract.

Bloated irrelevant dinosaur reviews same

[Rogerborg]

See Subject.

But will it run...

[Holistic Missile]

But will it run PostgreSQL?

:-)