If the hardware supports it, and there's enough diskspace, I would think that upgrading the OS would be a good idea. Just from Solaris 8 to 9 to 10, there have been some very big performance enhancements. Could help keep those old boxes running for a bit longer or at least just improve responsiveness.
I agree. For some embedded and real time applications it's important to be able to have the tightest code you can. But for the vast majority of stuff, it's not going to make any difference if you halve the time it takes to generate a 100ms string that gets fed into a 2sec database query.
Best advice is to code in a readable and consistent format. Profile your application after you're done and work on any real sore spots then. Let your experience give you some ideas on optimizations when you architect the system where it matters.
80-90% of your code won't need optimization in the real world, profile it and find that 10-20% that does. That will make a big difference.
You don't seem to understand what the difference between these two servers are.
The person implied that the 1142 is a cluster node, not the v40z. It's fairly obvious, that was one of the main purposes of designing the 1142h.
As a standalone server, it's not very good. There doesn't seem to be much redundancy in the design (excpt for the blowers). It's very powerful and compact server but if something fails on it, you're out of luck. In an HPC environment this doesn't really matter. You the rest of the servers in the cluster will keep on working.
You mentioned using raid-5 on the hard drives. This is probably why the original poster didn't bother replying to you. First, the Appro server only supports software based raid. You can install a scsi controller to do raid but raid-5 requres 3 drives. The 1142h only supports 2 drives.
If you're using it in a cluster, that single pci-x slot is probably going to be outfitted with something lie an infiniband card anyway. The onboard raid controller of the v40z only supports raid 1 (mirroring) but with 7 pci-x slots, adding a controller isn't a big deal.
As far as your software based management question, the LOM setup the sun server has will work even if the server is powered off, or can't boot.
They're designed to fill 2 different roles. One is meant to be a workhorse you can rely on, the other is meant to be part of one.
Another way to look at it, is that this might be where GNU ends up in a few years if Linux takes the kind of hold on computing people want it.
It's not uncommon to see young companies have the same type of attitude but along the way, as they become big, their strategies have to change based on the experience they have gained.
RMS is the driving idiological force behind GNU. People don't live forever. One day, someone else is going to take over and how do we know that the same ideals will be followed. More than that, how do we know that Stallman won't just decide one day that he's tired of living and dieing for free software and will shave his beard, take a shower and go on a date that doesn't charge by the hour?
Microsoft was the underdog for a long time. They came in cheaper and good enough. GNU/Linux right now is coming in as the cheaper/good enough solution. While there are some people that use free software on principle, the people paying for free software are doing it because it makes sense in their business... When something else makes sense, the money will follow.
One day, something else will take that spot and you're going to see a lot of whining and tantrums most likely followed by agressive tactics. To be perfectly honest, you see that now with competing open source technologies.
So, instead of seeing how Bill Gates has changed... consider this a warning as how F/OSS might possibly change in the future.
"Can't afford a support contract, but want an enterprise proven stable OS? Then Whitebox and Centos are currently as close as you come. Until OpenSolaris comes out."
OpenSolaris might be a ways away. But if you want an enterprise proven stable OS, that you don't have to pay for Solaris 10 is distributed freely, even though it's not open source. It's what most people would want. It's provided for use at no cost. Most people don't care about having the source.
In some news clippings, Sun has talked about releasing their Java Enterprise System as open source. It includes messaging and calendar as well as a number of other enterprise applications. If it's open sourced and available free it would be cool. There's already a plug in for Evolution.
For small shops, less than 100 employees, i think it may still be free. Otherwise you can get some peices of it for $50/employee/year.
Attorney General John Ashcroft, whose department crafted the deal, hailed the decision as "a major victory for consumers and businesses" and said his department was "strongly committed" to ensuring Microsoft abide by it.
Opponents of the settlement are likely to question the extent to which politics played a role in the agreement. The Justice Department has gone from advocating a breakup of Microsoft under the Clinton administration to accepting a much milder settlement at the behest of Assistant Attorney General Charles James.
The patents that sun granted aren't all up for expiring soon and have to do with operating systems, unlike the patents granted by IBM.
Open source doesn't just mean linux. They have released a lot of open source software. They are releasing their operating system as open source. This creates real competition in the open source kernel/operating system world. Look at other competing open source projects like Geronimo/JBoss, MySQL/PostgreSQL, Apache/ZOPE, etc.
Projects like Geronimo and JBoss are both open source, the software serves the same purpose but both can still exist and they can't just share code between the two. Having more options is a good thing. It's the same with OpenSolaris vs Linux.
Most of the things Sun has been saying about Linux have been good. They sell linux on their servers, they have a desktop that runs on linux, they maintain and distribute the Linux port for Java and more. The Linux community just likes to mouth off about Sun since Solaris deployments are an area where linux can gain more market share. It would be nicer if they could do it solely on the merits of Linux rather than resorting to trash talk though.
OSRM are claiming that Linux has a lot of IP problems as well.... And for only 150k a year they'll indemnify you. Maybe they're in cahoots with MS as well?
Most of what gets posted on Slashdot regarding Sun is negative. I had submitted a story about sun's CDDL OSI aproval and it wasn't put on the front page.
As much as people say that Sun is spreading FUD about linux it sure seems to be the other way around and has been going on for years. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if somehow IBM talked the OS loudmouths into attacking Sun so that they could help take marketshare away from solaris and IBM could try and get more control of Java. Linux zealots were always anti microsoft but there's no way that linux can unseat MS but Solaris is an easier target and it seems like they're using every thing they can to attack them.
Maybe this isn't the case but it sure as hell looks like it. The F/OSS community is a far different animal these days compared to it's beginnings.
"Their solutions are not cost effective for SOHO, small business, home users by any stretch."
Hmm.. their OS is free.. You can get their Java Enterprise System for $99 per employee per year, and it may still be free if you have less than 100 employees. Their opteron servers give you a lot of bang for the buck and they have ultrasparc based servers for under 1k. I think you need to have a look at Sun's Online Store and check out their pricing again.
The settlements for Sun and the CCIA weren't just monetary payments. They included agreemenets for cooperation.
I guess it depends what your definition of justice is. In my opinion, getting money to cover your legal fees and damages along with an agreement to work together doesn't seem so bad considering how the justice dept had taken it easy on microsoft and the appeals courts have overturned many possible remedies years ago.
It's nice to be able to stick to your guns for your principles, it's even nicer to expect someone else to stick up for your principles when there is very little you have to do on your own. I'm dealing with something similar myself where i've been fighting for something that someone else believes in when they haven't been able to put in as much time or effort as me. Somehow they think they do though. Short of a miracle, all we're doing is prolonging someone's suffering while taking it's emotional, personal and professional toll on me. My point, when someone else comes along and brings "justice" to microsoft, then I might listen to their criticisms of the settlements.
There are no Davids, only Goliaths in the real world. Maybe MS wasn't killed but it definately had to take notice and make some changes. Hopefully MS sticks to the spirit of their agreements and doesn't abuse their monopoly and work with the rest of the industry. If not, the next round of legal action will be harsher. As much as some people would like, windows and ms aren't dieing and aren't going anywhere anytime soon. As much as people want to believe there are better alternatives, right now there really aren't any in many key sectors. Primarily the corporate desktop.
Windows may be where it is now because of it's monopoly but there's no denying where it is in terms of software support. When something comes along that can run all the applications that windows users rely on things will be different. For now you can't just expect windows to be killed off just because of the way it got there. It would leave too many people and busineses hanging.
"I agree that the Microsoft settlement left a bad taste "
I really don't get this attitude. Sun stood up to MS for taking the embrase and extend approach to Java. They were also one of the biggest driving forces behind the antitrust cases here and in the EU. They spent a lot of resources over many years and eventually got a settlement offer that they were comfortable with and could move on.
Sun takes on Microsoft, a much larger company, over practices that MS has been using to screw over a lot of software companies but they're bad for winning a huge pile of cash in a settlement.
"Their intentions are entirely self-serving in this regard... but there isn't anything particularly wrong or evil with that."
I agree with what you said except for the entirely self-serving part. It's not entirely self-serving. It's also a big plus for the third party and corporate developers that develop for solaris. Probably even good for hardware vendors that want to be able to have their products work on solaris.
I was reading the news today and saw a headline that read some guy cut out his mother's pacemaker. It got my attention and I read the story. Turns out the guy didn't actually kill his mom by cutting out her pacemaker as the headline led me to believe. He just cut it out after she died because he had problems with the manufacturer of it. I wouldn't say that the reporter/editor lied.
In the first paragraph of their press release, they clearly define the relationship between the patents and the CDDL.
The headline "Sun Grants Global Open Source Community Access to More than 1,600 Patents" is a bit misleading A) but technically not false and B) it's just a headline. According to Sun, they've had a pilot group of OpenSolaris developers working on the process (I think it was over 100), in addition to the 900 or so Sun engineers working on it. If those people are scattered throghout the world, saying "Global Open Source Community" is technically accurate though not what one might expect.
Now, you're a smart enough guy to understand what a headline is, but from your posts on the past few articles relating to OpenSolaris, I'd say you're just here bashing Sun. You might have a couple of personal interests in doing so.
In the previous article, you kept making reference to Sun suing linux as if it was something they were just waiting to do. Nothing they've done so far indicates they would do that. Just because they said they won't use their patents against CDDL'd OpenSolaris doesn't imply they WILL use their patents against other operating systems as you were implying. I call FUD.
The server and software company clarified its position somewhat on Monday. "Clearly we have no intention of suing open-source developers," said Tom Goguen, head of Solaris marketing. However, he added, "We haven't put together a fancy pledge on our Web site" to that effect.
Sun also indemnifies JDS users from the copyright and patent claims of others. It does this for Solaris as well.
Maybe your posts on this topic have to do with scaring people enough to call OSRM or maybe it's the threat to linux that an open source solaris might have.
Solaris is probably has the most market share out of all the commercial unixes. Having it become open source as well as in free to aquire might seem like a threat to linux. Personally, I believe that each has a different development model that's diverse enough that they make sense in different areas even though there is quite a bit of overlap.
That's why I always thought that developers should get in the habbit of not distrubuting their software until they have someone to pay for it. Put a really big sticker price on it and if it's GPL'd let someone else distribute the source code if they want. Write some nifty thing.. Then charge 200k for it. After that.. the GPL can let it run wild. Screw that donation crap:)
So did every other company that needed to license svr4. What's your point? Scott McNeally mentioned in an interview that they couldn't say it at the time, but the money was being paid so they could be able to open source solaris.
Also, lets not forget that Novell but SCO in the position it is. Novel is even the reason that Caldera was set up in the first place. It's original purpose was to sue microsoft regarding drdos.
" Problem is, in order to use one of Sun's patents, you have to give them all of your patents. Hardly fair"
Not Quite. In order to participate with CDDL software (distributing, contributinng, whatever) you give up your right to enforce patent claims against that software (or maybe all cddl software in general?).
So lets say you're some server vendor. You decide to ship your products with opensolaris after making changes to the kernel that improves the performance on your systems. You have a patent on some type of memory management that you can see possible enforcementagainst opensolaris. You can not enforce it and abide by the terms of the cddl. In exchange, sun isn't enforcing the 1,600 operating system patents it has against you. Basically it says, anyone using this can't file patent claims. I'm sure sun has a lot more patents pertaining to solaris than other people might.
"With Sun's record on "opening" products I would have to say that it may be a waste of the Gentoo community's time since it is a source-based distro and requires that it's platform be open..."
Please, you could at least try to add some substance to your trollish post. Sun has a pretty good record with opening their products overall. Look at nfs, openoffice.org, netbeans, gridengine, plus the work they do with other projects like gnome, mozilla, various apache projects.
They're the first company taking their commercial unix os and making it opensource.
The only problem they've had opening up their products has been with java. And most real java developers don't wannt an open source java.
My point is still the same. Why does solaris, or any other open source project need to be able to have it's code mixed in with other projects for it to be useful as you imply? The benefit of solaris going open source is to the people that use solaris and those that write software for it.
As far as I can tell, it's the first commercial unix, if not commercial os in general that is going open source. One of the arguments people make for linux over commercial unixes, is that it's open and people can contribute to it to fix bugs, make enhancements, etc, and review the code. So making solaris open source will be good for solaris and the people that use it.
Just because you can't use it in Linux or other GNU software doesn't mean it is useless.
Slashdot Mirror
If the hardware supports it, and there's enough diskspace, I would think that upgrading the OS would be a good idea. Just from Solaris 8 to 9 to 10, there have been some very big performance enhancements. Could help keep those old boxes running for a bit longer or at least just improve responsiveness.
I just happened to read this today... It is another review of Solaris 10 and includes some limited comparisons to RHEL. Nothing exhaustive as far as the benchmarks go, but it's a pretty good review.
Didn't we (the US) already claim the moon? Let them go find their own moon. I hear saturn keeps popping up new ones we didn't know of before.
Best advice is to code in a readable and consistent format. Profile your application after you're done and work on any real sore spots then. Let your experience give you some ideas on optimizations when you architect the system where it matters.
80-90% of your code won't need optimization in the real world, profile it and find that 10-20% that does. That will make a big difference.
The person implied that the 1142 is a cluster node, not the v40z. It's fairly obvious, that was one of the main purposes of designing the 1142h.
As a standalone server, it's not very good. There doesn't seem to be much redundancy in the design (excpt for the blowers). It's very powerful and compact server but if something fails on it, you're out of luck. In an HPC environment this doesn't really matter. You the rest of the servers in the cluster will keep on working.
You mentioned using raid-5 on the hard drives. This is probably why the original poster didn't bother replying to you. First, the Appro server only supports software based raid. You can install a scsi controller to do raid but raid-5 requres 3 drives. The 1142h only supports 2 drives.
If you're using it in a cluster, that single pci-x slot is probably going to be outfitted with something lie an infiniband card anyway. The onboard raid controller of the v40z only supports raid 1 (mirroring) but with 7 pci-x slots, adding a controller isn't a big deal.
As far as your software based management question, the LOM setup the sun server has will work even if the server is powered off, or can't boot.
They're designed to fill 2 different roles. One is meant to be a workhorse you can rely on, the other is meant to be part of one.
It's not uncommon to see young companies have the same type of attitude but along the way, as they become big, their strategies have to change based on the experience they have gained.
RMS is the driving idiological force behind GNU. People don't live forever. One day, someone else is going to take over and how do we know that the same ideals will be followed. More than that, how do we know that Stallman won't just decide one day that he's tired of living and dieing for free software and will shave his beard, take a shower and go on a date that doesn't charge by the hour?
Microsoft was the underdog for a long time. They came in cheaper and good enough. GNU/Linux right now is coming in as the cheaper/good enough solution. While there are some people that use free software on principle, the people paying for free software are doing it because it makes sense in their business... When something else makes sense, the money will follow.
One day, something else will take that spot and you're going to see a lot of whining and tantrums most likely followed by agressive tactics. To be perfectly honest, you see that now with competing open source technologies.
So, instead of seeing how Bill Gates has changed... consider this a warning as how F/OSS might possibly change in the future.
OpenSolaris might be a ways away. But if you want an enterprise proven stable OS, that you don't have to pay for Solaris 10 is distributed freely, even though it's not open source. It's what most people would want. It's provided for use at no cost. Most people don't care about having the source.
For small shops, less than 100 employees, i think it may still be free. Otherwise you can get some peices of it for $50/employee/year.
From here
Or this:
From here
Ashcroft and James didn't have their positions in Clinton's administration.
Bad Moderators, go sit in the corner and think about what you've done.
Open source doesn't just mean linux. They have released a lot of open source software. They are releasing their operating system as open source. This creates real competition in the open source kernel/operating system world. Look at other competing open source projects like Geronimo/JBoss, MySQL/PostgreSQL, Apache/ZOPE, etc.
Projects like Geronimo and JBoss are both open source, the software serves the same purpose but both can still exist and they can't just share code between the two. Having more options is a good thing. It's the same with OpenSolaris vs Linux.
Most of the things Sun has been saying about Linux have been good. They sell linux on their servers, they have a desktop that runs on linux, they maintain and distribute the Linux port for Java and more. The Linux community just likes to mouth off about Sun since Solaris deployments are an area where linux can gain more market share. It would be nicer if they could do it solely on the merits of Linux rather than resorting to trash talk though.
OSRM are claiming that Linux has a lot of IP problems as well.... And for only 150k a year they'll indemnify you. Maybe they're in cahoots with MS as well?
As much as people say that Sun is spreading FUD about linux it sure seems to be the other way around and has been going on for years. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if somehow IBM talked the OS loudmouths into attacking Sun so that they could help take marketshare away from solaris and IBM could try and get more control of Java. Linux zealots were always anti microsoft but there's no way that linux can unseat MS but Solaris is an easier target and it seems like they're using every thing they can to attack them.
Maybe this isn't the case but it sure as hell looks like it. The F/OSS community is a far different animal these days compared to it's beginnings.
Hmm.. their OS is free.. You can get their Java Enterprise System for $99 per employee per year, and it may still be free if you have less than 100 employees. Their opteron servers give you a lot of bang for the buck and they have ultrasparc based servers for under 1k. I think you need to have a look at Sun's Online Store and check out their pricing again.
I guess it depends what your definition of justice is. In my opinion, getting money to cover your legal fees and damages along with an agreement to work together doesn't seem so bad considering how the justice dept had taken it easy on microsoft and the appeals courts have overturned many possible remedies years ago.
It's nice to be able to stick to your guns for your principles, it's even nicer to expect someone else to stick up for your principles when there is very little you have to do on your own. I'm dealing with something similar myself where i've been fighting for something that someone else believes in when they haven't been able to put in as much time or effort as me. Somehow they think they do though. Short of a miracle, all we're doing is prolonging someone's suffering while taking it's emotional, personal and professional toll on me. My point, when someone else comes along and brings "justice" to microsoft, then I might listen to their criticisms of the settlements.
There are no Davids, only Goliaths in the real world. Maybe MS wasn't killed but it definately had to take notice and make some changes. Hopefully MS sticks to the spirit of their agreements and doesn't abuse their monopoly and work with the rest of the industry. If not, the next round of legal action will be harsher. As much as some people would like, windows and ms aren't dieing and aren't going anywhere anytime soon. As much as people want to believe there are better alternatives, right now there really aren't any in many key sectors. Primarily the corporate desktop.
Windows may be where it is now because of it's monopoly but there's no denying where it is in terms of software support. When something comes along that can run all the applications that windows users rely on things will be different. For now you can't just expect windows to be killed off just because of the way it got there. It would leave too many people and busineses hanging.
Grmamar deos, but stuides have shwon taht if you at laset get the frist and last letetrs rihgt, poelpe can gerenaly raed it.
What exactly have they done that has been incredibly damaging?
I really don't get this attitude. Sun stood up to MS for taking the embrase and extend approach to Java. They were also one of the biggest driving forces behind the antitrust cases here and in the EU. They spent a lot of resources over many years and eventually got a settlement offer that they were comfortable with and could move on.
Sun takes on Microsoft, a much larger company, over practices that MS has been using to screw over a lot of software companies but they're bad for winning a huge pile of cash in a settlement.
I agree with what you said except for the entirely self-serving part. It's not entirely self-serving. It's also a big plus for the third party and corporate developers that develop for solaris. Probably even good for hardware vendors that want to be able to have their products work on solaris.
I was reading the news today and saw a headline that read some guy cut out his mother's pacemaker. It got my attention and I read the story. Turns out the guy didn't actually kill his mom by cutting out her pacemaker as the headline led me to believe. He just cut it out after she died because he had problems with the manufacturer of it. I wouldn't say that the reporter/editor lied.
In the first paragraph of their press release, they clearly define the relationship between the patents and the CDDL.
The headline "Sun Grants Global Open Source Community Access to More than 1,600 Patents" is a bit misleading A) but technically not false and B) it's just a headline. According to Sun, they've had a pilot group of OpenSolaris developers working on the process (I think it was over 100), in addition to the 900 or so Sun engineers working on it. If those people are scattered throghout the world, saying "Global Open Source Community" is technically accurate though not what one might expect.
Now, you're a smart enough guy to understand what a headline is, but from your posts on the past few articles relating to OpenSolaris, I'd say you're just here bashing Sun. You might have a couple of personal interests in doing so.
In the previous article, you kept making reference to Sun suing linux as if it was something they were just waiting to do. Nothing they've done so far indicates they would do that. Just because they said they won't use their patents against CDDL'd OpenSolaris doesn't imply they WILL use their patents against other operating systems as you were implying. I call FUD.
Just look here. Sun: Patent use OK beyond Solaris project
Sun also indemnifies JDS users from the copyright and patent claims of others. It does this for Solaris as well.Maybe your posts on this topic have to do with scaring people enough to call OSRM or maybe it's the threat to linux that an open source solaris might have.
Solaris is probably has the most market share out of all the commercial unixes. Having it become open source as well as in free to aquire might seem like a threat to linux. Personally, I believe that each has a different development model that's diverse enough that they make sense in different areas even though there is quite a bit of overlap.
That's why I always thought that developers should get in the habbit of not distrubuting their software until they have someone to pay for it. Put a really big sticker price on it and if it's GPL'd let someone else distribute the source code if they want. Write some nifty thing.. Then charge 200k for it. After that.. the GPL can let it run wild. Screw that donation crap :)
Yeah... write a letter to RMS, see if he'll put something that insures that in the next version of the GPL.
So did every other company that needed to license svr4. What's your point? Scott McNeally mentioned in an interview that they couldn't say it at the time, but the money was being paid so they could be able to open source solaris.
Also, lets not forget that Novell but SCO in the position it is. Novel is even the reason that Caldera was set up in the first place. It's original purpose was to sue microsoft regarding drdos.
Learn more, post less.
Not Quite. In order to participate with CDDL software (distributing, contributinng, whatever) you give up your right to enforce patent claims against that software (or maybe all cddl software in general?).
So lets say you're some server vendor. You decide to ship your products with opensolaris after making changes to the kernel that improves the performance on your systems. You have a patent on some type of memory management that you can see possible enforcementagainst opensolaris. You can not enforce it and abide by the terms of the cddl. In exchange, sun isn't enforcing the 1,600 operating system patents it has against you. Basically it says, anyone using this can't file patent claims. I'm sure sun has a lot more patents pertaining to solaris than other people might.
Please, you could at least try to add some substance to your trollish post. Sun has a pretty good record with opening their products overall. Look at nfs, openoffice.org, netbeans, gridengine, plus the work they do with other projects like gnome, mozilla, various apache projects.
They're the first company taking their commercial unix os and making it opensource.
The only problem they've had opening up their products has been with java. And most real java developers don't wannt an open source java.
As far as I can tell, it's the first commercial unix, if not commercial os in general that is going open source. One of the arguments people make for linux over commercial unixes, is that it's open and people can contribute to it to fix bugs, make enhancements, etc, and review the code. So making solaris open source will be good for solaris and the people that use it.
Just because you can't use it in Linux or other GNU software doesn't mean it is useless.