linux & hp-ux differences?

[Martin Johnson]

There is more business software for HPUX than Linux. Much of the software that we run on HPUX does not currently run on Linux.

Linux's major selling point is that Linux on a PC is MUCH cheaper than HPUX on a HP9000. But if it doesn't run your applications, it is worthless.

HTH
Marty

[doug mielke]

HOLY COW! ( cash cow, that is)
SEP, what a great point.
If Oracle pricing per proccesor not cheaper on Intel then that explains the recent flashy overtures Oracle seem to be making to the Lynix community. Cheap multi x multi intel servers could make Ellison rich. ( ha )

BTW: A common Happy Hour debate here is over the proper pronunciation of Lynix.
( When I saw an interview with the Master, he introduced himself such that his name rhymed with Guinness.)

[Pete Randall]

Doug,

All the Linux session I've been to have pronounced it that way (rhyming with Guiness, rather than rhyming with wine). Linus himself pronounces it that way, so I guess that pretty much settles that debate.


Pete

[John Poff]

Hi,

In regards to the Intel vs. PA-RISC comparison, I have very recently been involved in a test here for a new application that will be running on Linux. The application uses an Oracle database.

We originally loaded it on an 8-way N4000 box (550Mhz CPUs I think) running 11i, connected to an FC10 disk array and ran the application [after a bit of tuning] in 1 hour and 45 minutes. We just loaded the same application on an IBM x345 with 2 Xeon 2.8Ghz CPUs and 8 Gb of RAM, running RedHat AS 2.1 and using an internal RAID5 array. The application ran in 2 hours and 5 minutes, straight up, without tweaking the OS or Oracle.

I am as big a fan of HP and HP-UX as anybody else out here. There are still large, critical applications that belong on big HP systems, but the Intel CPUs and Linux have come a long way in a short time.

As for reliability, I have some small Intel boxes that run Linux for months on end. I have one box that is halfway across the country, running on an old HP Kayak that was abandoned two years ago by our desktop team because it was too slow to run the latest Windows. I salvaged it, loaded RedHat 7.0 on it, and it does a great job as a file server [Samba] and an ftp and print server. It has only been down once in the last 27 months, for a planned power outage. For the right applications, Linux is a great fit.

The requirement for our project is that this application run in two hours or less. I wonder which way they are going to go now? ;)

JP

[doug mielke]

thanks Pete, for taking away yet another reason for me to go to Happy Hour.

[doug mielke]

thanks Pete, for taking away yet another reason for me to go to Happy Hour.

Now If we can just get SCO Group ( Bill Gates??) to cease it's attack on Lynix.

[Pete Randall]

Sorry, Doug, but I thought I was just echoing the conclusion you'd reached already. I, for one, would never want to ruin happy hour (or happy evening/day/week/month/year/life) for anybody.

;^)


Pete

[Caesar_3]

Hello!

First in HPUX there is no Lin.

Linux it's open source it's mean that you
can change the system as you like.
You can build new system from nothing.

Linux became more popular in the world.

HP give a full suport for his OS as for
linux it's difrent.

Caesar

[kenny chia]

One costs a bomb while the other is free..

The quantity of software utilities available for Linux is more than HPUX but in terms of quality and workability, HPUX software is better (eg ignite and SAM)

[Stefan Farrelly]

JP has a very interesting comment about Oracle and performance differences on HP-UX v Linix. Were a big Oracle house and if Oracle licenses were cheaper on Linux than HP-UX we would certainly be trialing some.

As for Linux not being industrial strength - it damn well is - what do you think amazon.com runs on ? A huge cluster of Linux boxes all running clustering software, managed by HP. Thats all 7x24 non stop, and very reliable. A node drops and its simply removed from the cluster and another one added in.