Aside from not posting their encoding settings, they didn't even include the fully featured Sorenson Pro, which includes better features such as bidirectional prediction. They also didn't include the best of breed On2 Technologies VP6.
That's like having a "race of the speedsters" without a Ferrari. WTF?
I just recently read somewhere (was it here?) that the Russian space budget is less than a billion dollars. Apparently, the ESA spends between 15-20 billion and the US is well over double that. It would be amazing to see if they progress smoothly with such little capital. Maybe we could learn a thing or two...
You're missing out on some of the Solaris enterprise features if you use Linux on midrange Sun boxes.
I know I pointed this out in a previous post, but I'll repeat it here for the sake of discussion.
Solaris 9-current has system call performance this is equal or better to Linux 2.4.22+ in "all the right places". Not to mention, being able to use DR to add or remove system boards, CPUs, memory, disk and network interfaces on the fly in multi-user mode. I/O multipathing for fiberchannel and TCP/IP network multipathing--all carrier grade and "enterprise" ready.
Running Linux in an enterprise setting on midrange Sun hardware seems like it would be a waste. You'd lose all of the above... granted, getting a working build of KDE on Sun hardware is significantly easier with a Linux variant.;);)
There's a reason why they are piping up the rhetoric... very recent recommended patchkits include a kernel patch (dated around Christmas eve) that have very specific "fixes" which include massive performance improvements in over a dozen system calls. Each fix/report states that those system calls were slower when tested against Linux 2.4/2.6. The fixes have been back-ported to Solaris 9 and are included in Solaris 10. Hope this helps.
I disagree with the parent poster. 5.7 was the first OS generation with 64-bit support... including kernel modules that were compiled for 64-bit use. This yielded a significant performance boost for heavy I/O-based applications, as device drivers could transfer larger quantities of data with a single transaction (if using PIO).
Also. Solaris 9 incorporated priority paging and the new single LWP/kernel thread model. The new model makes large-threaded applications scale incredibly well.
All 35 of my servers are running Solaris 9 and they run very well.
Some of the advantages over the free UNIX variants that Solaris possesses include things like Dynamic Reconfiguration (did your system board or CPU or physical memory or network interface or SCSI/fiberchannel interface just fail? That's okay, just cfgadm -c disconnect it and swap it out), mpxio (OS-based multipathing of fiberchannel I/O), hotplug support (mostly falls under dynamic reconfiguration), ipmp (IP multipathing -- dynamic failover of network interfaces). This functionality is built into the operating system, and most of it works on even the most basic Sun-based hardware. Things like system board-level DR require workgroup servers or better.
Slashdot Mirror
Aside from not posting their encoding settings, they didn't even include the fully featured Sorenson Pro, which includes better features such as bidirectional prediction. They also didn't include the best of breed On2 Technologies VP6. That's like having a "race of the speedsters" without a Ferrari. WTF?
I just recently read somewhere (was it here?) that the Russian space budget is less than a billion dollars. Apparently, the ESA spends between 15-20 billion and the US is well over double that. It would be amazing to see if they progress smoothly with such little capital. Maybe we could learn a thing or two...
You're missing out on some of the Solaris enterprise features if you use Linux on midrange Sun boxes. I know I pointed this out in a previous post, but I'll repeat it here for the sake of discussion. Solaris 9-current has system call performance this is equal or better to Linux 2.4.22+ in "all the right places". Not to mention, being able to use DR to add or remove system boards, CPUs, memory, disk and network interfaces on the fly in multi-user mode. I/O multipathing for fiberchannel and TCP/IP network multipathing--all carrier grade and "enterprise" ready. Running Linux in an enterprise setting on midrange Sun hardware seems like it would be a waste. You'd lose all of the above... granted, getting a working build of KDE on Sun hardware is significantly easier with a Linux variant. ;) ;)
There's a reason why they are piping up the rhetoric... very recent recommended patchkits include a kernel patch (dated around Christmas eve) that have very specific "fixes" which include massive performance improvements in over a dozen system calls. Each fix/report states that those system calls were slower when tested against Linux 2.4/2.6. The fixes have been back-ported to Solaris 9 and are included in Solaris 10. Hope this helps.
I disagree with the parent poster. 5.7 was the first OS generation with 64-bit support... including kernel modules that were compiled for 64-bit use. This yielded a significant performance boost for heavy I/O-based applications, as device drivers could transfer larger quantities of data with a single transaction (if using PIO).
Also. Solaris 9 incorporated priority paging and the new single LWP/kernel thread model. The new model makes large-threaded applications scale incredibly well.
All 35 of my servers are running Solaris 9 and they run very well.
Some of the advantages over the free UNIX variants that Solaris possesses include things like Dynamic Reconfiguration (did your system board or CPU or physical memory or network interface or SCSI/fiberchannel interface just fail? That's okay, just cfgadm -c disconnect it and swap it out), mpxio (OS-based multipathing of fiberchannel I/O), hotplug support (mostly falls under dynamic reconfiguration), ipmp (IP multipathing -- dynamic failover of network interfaces). This functionality is built into the operating system, and most of it works on even the most basic Sun-based hardware. Things like system board-level DR require workgroup servers or better.