Re: Intel vs Sparc

From: Rhugga <ccarson_NOBLEEPING_SPAM_at_syrrx.com>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 20:50:50 -0800
Message-ID: <3E472FAA.9020804_at_syrrx.com>

P.M. Groen wrote:
> DA Morgan wrote:
>
> -----------------*<---------------------------------------------------
>
>

>>Suffice it to
>>say that Intel means Windows and Windows is more vulnerable to viruses,
>>cracking, and stability problems as well as almost always equating with
>>increased down-time.
>>
>>Daniel Morgan

>
>
> BullSH*T!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Intel also means Linux. And in case you haven't noticed. Oracle runs
> perfectly on SuSE 7.x and higher, RedHat 7.2 and Higher and probably more
> distro's. So if you want to save money, want stability and security, go for
> Linux on Intel and install ORACLE on it.

Yea, Linux is fine if you can get by on small memory models, say 4gb or less. Face it, the Linux kernel is still in it's infancy when it comes to memory management and large memory support. (not too mention intel is still 32-bit with realistic 64-bit applications a ways away)

A large memory Linux box would be like a mole on the ass of a large memory Sun box. I have seen Linux fail miserably in three different enterprise environments due to poor kernel architecture and x86 hardware limitations. (2 oracle servers and 1 NFS server)

I love Linux, but as a data center manager and my ass on the line, I have to go with proven performers. Linux is great for applications that can scale laterlly, as in behind an IP load balancer or what not, but a database has to be finely-tuned to take advantage of a single piece of hardware, maximizing all resources. (unless you brave parrallel server)

We recently moved some Oracle databases running on SuSE 7.x, 4 CPU, 4gb ram to Sun 280R's, 2x750Mhz CPU's, 4gb RAM, and the difference was night and day. Internal Oracle SGA contention disappeared (well almost completely, we still get random spikes) as well as better hit ratios with identical loads and applications. The bottleneck was moved back to the disk subsystem, which is where the bottleneck for any Oracle database should be. (otherwise your system is tuned incorrectly)

Just ranting I guess, I get peaved when I see people suggest Linux for all situations when they have really only seem it perform well under smaller non-enterprise class loads. We have paid a great deal of money to evaluate Linux in our enterprise, and it just hasn't made the grade. (whether it be our core NFS servers, weblogic servers, or Oracle servers) I have been using Linux since kernel 0.97, so I am a huge fan, but it still has leaps and bounds to go before it can compete with the larger Sun boxes. (there is a reason why the large Sun boxes cost so much) I agree that x86 hardware is one of the limiting factors for the success of Linux in the enterprise but the kernel itself has a few rough edges as well. The next few kernels really need to address its time slicing issues and memory management. (I think the time slicing issues are getting a major overhaul in the 2.7 series, but not 100% sure on that)

Some main points why Sun is the better choice (this could be your paragraph if you will):

1. x86 hardware does not have an answer for the large backplanes that Sun enterprise class systems have. Most x86 systems have maybe 1 to 2 66Mhz PCI busses at most, which means you are limited to 2x512Mb bandwidth, which is shared by ALL PCI devices. Sun gives you a dedicated 512MB per device (soon will be 1024MB) for 66 Mhz slots, and 132MB for 33 Mhz slots. (This point alone is why Sun is a winner) Have you ever stuck a 2-gigabit HBA in an x86 system and actually measured what kind of performance you can get? 132MB tops.
2. Sun can handle single CPU failures in multi-cpu systems. x86 does not reliably do this
3. Sun can handle TB's of memory, and use it effectively. Linux has trouble using more than 4gb, and even then ineffectively.
4. Sun hardware has a much greater tolerance to high temperatures, which reduces transister burn-outs with age. Pentiums are notorious for this problem. We once had our AC die on a Saturday morning, which resultde in our data center cooking for 2 days, which included a 250-node Western Scientific Linux cluster. Ever since then our Linux nodes became increasingly unreliable, with routine kernel panics and etc... (We also lost some Compaq Windows servers as well) The only thing that happened to our Sun gear was that a few of the CPU's were placed offline, but the machine chugged on.
5. Lastly SUPPORT SUPPORT SUPPORT!!!! If any component in my Sun server fails, I have a replacement in 2 - 4 hours, 24x7. I know companies claim they can give Enterprise class support to x86 systems but non truly deliver. If you know of one please let me know, I have tried several. We recently replaced our West. Sci. cluster with a 250-node IBM cluster and still parts turnaround and support takes upwards of 5 business days. Support can make or break your IT success.

Just my 64 bits.

-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------

   http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =----- Received on Mon Feb 10 2003 - 05:50:50 CET