Slashdot Mirror
Oracle Releases SPARC T5 Servers; Too Late?
First time accepted submitter bobthesungeek76036 writes "On March 26th, Larry Ellison and always with fashionable haircut John Fowler announced the new line of SPARC servers from Oracle. Touted as the fastest microprocessor in the world, they put up some impressive SPEC numbers against much more expensive (and older) IBM hardware. Is the industry still interested in SPARC or is it too late for Larry to regain the server market that Sun Microsystems had many moons ago?"
El Reg has a pretty good overview of the new hardware; the T5 certainly looks interesting for highly threaded work loads (there's some massive SMT going on with 16 threads per core), but with Intel dominating for single-threaded performance and ARM-based servers becoming available squeezing them for massive multi-threading, is there really any hope in Oracle's efforts to stay in the hardware game?
While the T5 may be insignificant to a huge swath of the server market, there are many sectors (financial, energy, Federal, geo, etc.) that make significant use of SPARC platforms. The T5 is a huge advance to these markets. Oracle's not really struggling to stay in the hardware game is the Reg indicates. They produce much of their x86 gear because they use it in the Exa stuff. Their SPARCs are their bread and butter hardware in terms of raw server power. They will sell them as fast as they can produce them. Their recently announced move of manufacturing facilities from Mexico to Oregon is indicative of demand. They build their Exa's in Oregon. They worked a deal with the Oregon state Gov (tax incentives) to move their server manufacturing there in order to compress the logistics lag in getting the servers for the Exa to the kitting facility. Anyway, just my two cents.
That's something you can do today with FPGAs anyway. No need to wait a few years.
Oracle is going to need to come up with a new game to make waves with the new processor. Simply improving a processor isn't going to change the fact that what people want are low cost processors without vendor lock in.
Sun made a name for itself with interesting hardware, but that was before processing power was a commodity. There are definitely organizations that still run SPARC, and some others who need top of the line performance that will at least give it a shot, but everyone who has a brain and a little industry experience knows that you can't just "try out" the new SPARC with Oracle in charge. If you walk any distance down that road, you start paying premium prices for every little feature you want going forward.
I used to work in exclusively Sun shops, and I've dealt with Oracle for years. There's little that the hardware and their database can do that can't be replicated by x64 and something like Postgres with some thought behind your architecture. For certain, the features they do have are not cost effective against the hundreds of thousands of dollars you pay for Oracle DB licensing, and the premium you pay for SPARC hardware and support.
The performance is just a factor, they can sell if Oracle prices it right, accounting for performance-per-watt of their stack vs. the competing ones.
Sparc being an exotic arch cuts both way, you sure have more trouble with ports, OTOH hackers have to adapt their tools to penetrate those servers, in many cases it's overall a plus.
The main obstacle IMHO is that those servers come from "we are indeed evil" Oracle ;)
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
I have not seen Sparcs in years. They are so 2003. Kind of sad as we move to generic x86 but Sun really screwed up marketing these and Oracle is not helping by requiring an Oracle RDBMS license whether they are an oracle shop or not does not help. Oracle has also been happy to tell people with perfectly good Sparc Ultra I's to go fuck themselves we wont patch your systems anymore unless you pay us $$$ for your 12 year old systems you already paid for!
You can tell I do not like Oracle so consider my opinion biased. True they can multithread really well but the performance is slow and the industry has moved to clustered low cost blades to spread things out instead in such programs. The issue with threading on a single big ass server is not as big as it once was but still used in limited circumstances.
I thought the UltraSparc was legacy at this point so I am surprised.
http://saveie6.com/
The posts so far are missing the point. The point is that Oracle certifies their products to run on their hardware. They have a captive audience.
We're running away from SPARC as fast as we can.
Our unix shop used to be primarily SPARC-based, but with limited IT budgets, we're able to do far more with much less money using HP blades running CentOS.
For most purposes, SPARC hardware is far too expensive and Oracle seems to be doing all they can to kill Solaris.
We still run a handfull of SPARC systems that run specialized applications and a few Solaris zones, but nearly all other services have been pushed to natively hosted Linux systems, or virtual machines running Windows or Linux.
Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
I think the larger issue with Solaris is that Oracle is intentionally murdering the "mindshare" of their users.
At least part of vendor support is aftermarket support .. right now you can't get patch clusters, bug reports or documentation without a current support contract.
Same with downloading of Solaris media .. if you want to run solaris sparc on your old blade 1500 to compile/debug stuff before moving it to a production machine .. you can't, not without a hardware contract .. at least not easily.
Oracle/Sun has always been a premium value proposition .. nobody gets them because they were the cheapest, but shutting out your users entirely is more than counterproductive for the amount of revenue realized.
As far as Solaris x86 .. IDK, back when it was a going concern, Sun was dabbling in linux, was competing with a half dozen unix on x86 vendors, and was pushing JAVA as a "run anywhere" / platform agnostic environment.
in other words, very few people were hampered by the lack of a Solaris/86 version of their application.
You seem somewhat ignorant of the platform you are criticizing. Yes, we know it's not x86 so the fact that it doesn't run Windows isn't a surprise. You can run Linux on SPARC, don't know why you would want to though, Solaris is very good. No, it's not Linux, but it's still very good.
As far as virtualization goes, they've had hardware support for longer than the x86 line. The Niagara line of processes have had hypervisors as an integral part of the system since the first generation T-1 processors in the T-1000 servers.
Don't even know wtf you are talking about as far as "architectural design does not simplify operations and make IT more agile." Solaris supports all modern technologies commonly found in a data center.
I learned on Linux and Solaris (x86/SPARC) when I was 15, and I'm now 32 still using both (do the math).
A saying was told me to growing up, "Use the Proper Tool for the Job" which varies person to person, BUT for me SPARC and Solaris is the right tool. I see the OpenSource community as a great community. My WHOLE stack runs on OpenSource software. I beta-test/develop MUCH of my stuff on either Linux or OSX.
But when it comes to the production OS, I'm not some blanketed Linux bigot. I'm an *NIX Admin and an Architect at heart.
Professionally I'm a CTO (I do everything from programming php / data-center / network / DBA / UNIX / security / etc.) for an internet-based start-up that runs Solaris 10 and used SPARC CoolThread hardware in production. Baffled why? For a few reasons:
When I did a cost analysis of my time & the company's money vs Intel offerings and SPARC I eventually came away with these main points.
1.) SPARC hardware is still WAY superior with remote management than any x86 POS I've ever managed. The ALOM on a SPARC and a serial cable from my Mac works EVERY time. When I worked in past shops managing thousands of Linux Dells and HP's we had nothing but issues with ILOs from the hardware and OS side. Just pure donkey shit.
When you're a start-up buying used hardware it is a great way to cut cost where investors/owners LOVE. Frankly SPARC hardware in my experience can keep on chugging where those HPs and Dells are falling apart right and left. I don't have time to be fucking with hardware when I'm running the show of a million hats.
2.) LONG-term stability with Solaris 10 and maybe Solaris 11 (still evaluating) is a necessity to me. I work for a crazy ass mad-scientist type who does EVERYTHING custom. He's worse than the scientists that I worked with back at JPL-NASA. He has software that's been running for a decade, and the software/application I write with him now he wants to work years down the road as well. That means, I don't need to worry about a yum or apt get update that blows away some part that is critical to ONLY us and I gotta figure WTF happened. The OS is a critical back-bone element where I've seen "Linux dependency hell" fuck me so many times and cost me so many hours, that I PREFER building my own Solaris 10 packages and Solaris 11 (still in testing for me) packages (Yes, I'm a REAL UNIX admin no these lazy wanders) without worries that the OS will be compromised by something lame. In the long-run I have more freedom to enjoy time with my doggies.
When you work for a company that builds custom crap that. Everything it talks to regarding the OS needs to work without question. I have always have had that with Solaris SPARC and with Support till 2018 or extended 2021 by then I should be retired from the gig! But I KNOW nothing funky will happen with the OS while I'm working here. For each new x86 hardware update for Linux, it's a whole new 'testing' to make sure it doesn't blow up the OS on the next reboot. Never had that with SPARC of maintained properly.
With that long-term support and marriage to the hardware I know the relationship is TIGHT, that can be VERY useful when you're concerned with down the road support or integration. Dell or HP does a hardware update and the RedHat or Debian kernel or images haven't been added, then you gotta do a post image. FUCK THAT NIGHTMARE! SPARC WORKS end of story.
3.) Threads! NOTHING compares to SPARC when it comes to multiple threads and what not. My T2000's running 32 cores make damn good web-servers. They also save space in the rack as well!
4.) Virtualization is WAY superior than KVM or VMWare. I've used many of the OpenSource VM solutions and frankly non compare to the control that I can do with either LDOMs or Solaris Containers/zones.
5.) ZFS yeah, Linux we hear your promises of a bad-ass filesystem, I'm still waiting.
So, is Oracle and SPARC dead? Popularity may go down, that's normal, but it's not "dead" to anyone who has a reason/purpose to use the OS/hardware offered.
The world isn't one big LAMP stack.
Again, I'm not *against* Linux, I use it for development and personal shit all day. However, I'm not a blind follower either.
Insightful? No. I have an FPGA dev board on my desk. The dev board costs around $8K, the FPGA alone can be bought in small quantities for about $4K. We use it for experimental processor design. It can run our MIPS64-based softcore at about 100MHz (drawing around 40W) and there's enough space on die for 4-8 cores. You can't run a processor on one that is competitive with a cheap ARM processor (except if you configure the FPGA for a single algorithm, then you can't run general-purpose code on it), let alone one with 'all the power and capabilities we want'. FPGAs are cool, but they're no substitute for ASICs.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News