Re: Oracle on Linux Anyone?

From: guy ruth hammond <grh_at_agency.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:23:35 +0100
Message-Id: <10528.109357@fatcity.com>

"Eric D. Pierce" wrote:

> excerpt: Support was another factor in


>                 choosing Linux, Google said. The

>                 company has Linux expertise

>                 in-house, and values the ability to

>                 look at the source code to correct

>                 problems, rather than having to

>                 rely on a vendor. 


This is often touted as an advantage of Linux, but it doesn't stand
up to real world operations. For a start, we are DBAs and consultants - 
we are not paid to debug operating systems, and I doubt many of us
have the skill to do so anyway (I certainly don't). Secondly, if
you modify an OS which you then hand over to a client, think about

the implications. Firstly, who is going to take responsibility for maintaining it? How will you test to ensure that all existing software the client may wish to run in the future is compatible with your changes? What will stop the next set of kernel patches overwriting your changes, and will that then cause your application to fail? If your changes offer competitive advantage to your client, are they willing to comply with the GPL and release that code to the rest of the community, including their competitors?

I am not denying that Linux has its place, for example, if you need cheap X workstations for desktops, it's great. But issues like the one I mentioned mean that careful thought is needed before choosing it. The cost of an OS license is negligible compared to the overall cost of a project. The two largest factors are a) physical assets such as hardware, bandwidth etc. and b) consultant's billable hours. If you are getting an OS with the hardware anyway (i.e. Solaris on Sun, NT on Compaq, whatever), and your consultants save time because they were working on your application (with the vendor picking up the cost of any OS bugs that are reported and supplying patches) then the fact that Linux is free becomes less compelling. And, at this moment in time, Linux can't really compete with a commercial Unix in features or power.

YMMV, of course.

Cheers,

(who is *not* the SA :0) )

-- 
guy ruth hammond <grh_at_agency.com> | One is punished for being
Technology Analysis & Consulting  | weak, not for being cruel.
07879607148 http://www.agency.com |       -- Baudelaire

Received on Wed Jun 14 2000 - 13:23:35 CDT