Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> They already have some knowledge about their OS and they're not likely to do a hard turn for different OS just for the sake of "understanding UNIX", as it would require quite large effort to just get to the point where they are already with Linux.

How about no priority 1 incidents at 02:03 in the morning, resulting in sleepless nights until 07:30 - 08:30 every day during one's on call, wasted on stupid problems like ext3 filesystem corruption caused by lost writes (again: http://danluu.com/file-consistency/)? Is that a compelling enough reason?

No incidents at dead hours of the night. A programming environment fully supporting standards. Same software which runs on Linux. Guaranteed application binary interface backward compatibility: compile on oldest SunOS 5.# you can find, run on all the versions newer than that one. Change schedulers on the fly, as you need them. Realtime subsystem. kdb and mdb: the best post mortem analysis tools in the industry (what are those system administrators going to do when the kernel crashes so bad that it locks up and doesn't dump a stack trace?) Full security isolation and bare metal performance with zones.

Exhaustive documentation ("he who can read is clearly at an advantage"), much of it applicable to illumos / SmartOS:

http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19253-01/817-1985/

Should I go on?



> How about no priority 1 incidents at 02:03 in the morning, resulting in sleepless nights until 07:30 - 08:30 every day during one's on call, wasted on stupid problems like ext3 filesystem corruption caused by lost writes (again: http://danluu.com/file-consistency/)? Is that a compelling enough reason?

I won't have calls about corrupted ext3, because I use XFS, so not much of a point.

"No priority 1 incidents" is not a function of an operating system, so it can't be a compelling reason to switch. You would still need to elaborate why exactly Linux doesn't work, especially when it works well enough in most admins' perception.

> A programming environment fully supporting standards.

Becasue Linux doesn't support a very important standard of... Could you help me here? Nothing comes to my mind.

> Same software which runs on Linux.

Sweet. I should learn Solaris, so I can run the same software as I currently can on Linux.

Do you hear how ridiculous this point is?

> Guaranteed application binary interface backward compatibility: compile on oldest SunOS 5. you can find, run on all the versions newer than that one.

Only ABI of kernel and (probably) OS-supplied libraries, which is not that much when it comes to what most of the companies run.

> Change schedulers on the fly, as you need them. Realtime subsystem.

Of course, because Linux doesn't allow to change schedulers and has no realtime subsystem.

> kdb and mdb: the best post mortem analysis tools in the industry (what are those system administrators going to do when the kernel crashes so bad that it locks up and doesn't dump a stack trace?)

This is a very distant benefit. One needs to be accustomed with kernel-level code in the first place to make any use of these.

> Full security isolation and bare metal performance with zones.

You get bare metal performance with Linux containers as well, so not a strong point. Only the "full security isolation" could be a sensible reason, but then, it should be proven by close scrutiny. I haven't heard too much about people analyzing Solaris zones, so I'm not likely to be convinced out of thin air that this argument applies.

> Exhaustive documentation ("he who can read is clearly at an advantage"), much of it applicable to illumos / SmartOS:

> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19253-01/817-1985/

OK, let's go to booting chapter: http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19253-01/817-1985/hboverview-2546...

This is barely enough for a trained sysadmin to learn how booting works and where to nudge when things go awry or how to do less standard tasks (e.g. I'm not sure how much time would it take me if I needed to build a custom live CD image; probably quite a lot, judging from boot(1M) man page).

Even if it's exhaustive, it suffers from not having much between step-by-step-and-don't-think instructions and deep documentation that requires prior understanding of the system.

> Should I go on?

You haven't provided many arguments that would be sensible reasons (let alone being strong reasons) to invest in migrating to Solaris.

I think we should disengage from this discussion. If I was in (what I believe is) your state of mind, I couldn't muster any good argument that would convince my interlocutor.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: