Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Sep 2013 22:04 UTC, submitted by garyd
General Development

ZFS is the world's most advanced filesystem, in active development for over a decade. Recent development has continued in the open, and OpenZFS is the new formal name for this open community of developers, users, and companies improving, using, and building on ZFS. Founded by members of the Linux, FreeBSD, Mac OS X, and illumos communities, including Matt Ahrens, one of the two original authors of ZFS, the OpenZFS community brings together over a hundred software developers from these platforms.

ZFS plays a major role in Solaris, of course, but beyond that, has it found other major homes? In fact, now that we're at it, how is Solaris doing anyway?

Permalink for comment 572620
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Solaris is doing well
by Alfman on Fri 20th Sep 2013 14:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Solaris is doing well"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Kebabbert,

"Larry Ellison said that Linux is for lowend in an official interview. Read here for Oracle's official stand on Linux vs Solaris:"

I was unable to find the interview in your link (membership required?) Of course he would say that though, he's biased. Bill Gates would have said the same thing regarding windows. They are not really going to admit that their products can be replaced by much cheaper linux alternatives, even if it were true. I hope you understand why asking Larry Ellison is meaningless. Consider his claim here:

http://www.x-drivers.com/news/hardware/4900.html
"Oracle claimed a legion of record-breaking benchmark performances for the T4-4. Ellison repeatedly compared the performance of the T4-based Sparc SuperCluster to IBM's Power lineā€”and the Power 795 in particular. A one-rack T4 SuperCluster 'is twice as fast as IBM's fastest computer, at half the cost,' he claimed."

When in fact... "But the benchmarks that Oracle cited were mostly internal ones. Those may carry some weight for many Oracle customers, but there were only two that really hint at the T4-4's performance beyond software that has been tuned for that processor. One of those third-party benchmarks was the TPC-H benchmark for a 1,000 GB load, in which the T4-4 beat the IBM Power 780 and Itanium-based HP Superdome 2 on price/performance, raw performance, and throughput."

and

"The T4 is still outperformed on Oracle Database 11g by HP's BladeSystem RAC configuration running Oracle Linux, and edged out by HP's Proliant DL980 G7 running Microsoft SQL Server 2008 and Windows Server 2008 both on price performance and raw power. Both are x86 systems."

I'm not sure whether the additional cores with Sparc are actually beneficial. I just wasn't able to find much information about it.


"The question is if Linux scales on a single fat server. And Linux does not scale on such a SMP server, because there have never existed such a Linux server with 16 or 32 cpus for sale. There are Linux clusters for sale, with 1000s of cores, but no 16/32 cpu Linux server for sale. So, if there does not exist any 32 socket Linux servers, how can Linux scale well on SMP servers? They dont even exist, how can anyone even benchmark and assess the Linux scalability? "


Do you know if it's *really* a linux problem instead of an x86 SMP scalability problem? I honestly don't think x86 can scale efficiently beyond 8 cores under any OS. My understanding is that linux will run on the same Sparc architectures that Solaris does:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTE5Nzc

Do you have a benchmark of an apples to apples comparison between solaris and linux on the same processors (ignoring that such processors are not being sold with linux)?


Mind you solaris *could* be better than linux for high end deployments. I'm genuinely curious about it, and if you have any evidence (benchmarks & case studies) that would be very informative to me.

For that matter, I'm very curious about the scalability of 64 core shared memory systems in general regardless of OS. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that it would scale badly unless it were NUMA (or it had so much cache that it could effectively be used as NUMA).

It's fun to talk to others who are passionate about this stuff!

Edited 2013-09-20 15:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3