Operating System - HP-UX
1833778 Members
2009 Online
110063 Solutions
New Discussion

linux & hp-ux differences?

 
SOLVED
Go to solution
Andy Beal
Frequent Advisor

Re: linux & hp-ux differences?

HP-UX is much more mature, especially if your playing in a 64 bit arena. Linux for the Itanium is availiable, but I've never heard of anyone running it production. Big enough applications can call for 64 bit in some situations, read on.

One year ago we deployed Oracle 9i database on a RedHat Advanced server, dual 2.4 Ghz Xeons 4 Gb of memory. After 6 months of pure pain, worry and suffering we moved the whole thing to a rp5470 (dual 64 bit 875Mhz).

Reasons: I had continual VM problems that RedHat as a company wouldn't acknowledge, however thier engineers did. (This is finally fixed! I hope I'm deploying 2 smaller Oracle/Linux installations in the next few weeks)

32bit Linux can only get 1.7Gb of shared memory, severely limiting the amount of users that can be on a single box, especially when your numbers dictate using MTS. There is a Kernel "Hack" availiable to get 2.7 GB out of it, but due to the fragile VM subsystem I'd not recommend it.

Linux is not really a bad OS, just like HP-UX is very flexible and as others pointeed out, very servicable if you like searching google and the Mailing lists. If you doing Oracle and you want a lot of users in the end even oracle admits you better switch to industrial unix. "Oh, when you said 1000 user sessions I didn;t think you really meant 1000." Doh.

Andy
Trever Furnish
Regular Advisor

Re: linux & hp-ux differences?

Were you just trolling to see how much of an OS war you could start? :-)

Implication was made above that comparing hpux and linux means comparing ide and scsi - that's ridiculous. Linux does scsi just fine.

Implication was also made that HPUX is more secure than Linux - I'd have to say that a default redhat install facing the public leaves me feeling a LOT more secure than a default hpux install. HP brags about security, then refuses to stop releasing their OS with improper file permissions all over the place. Their openssh package of all things even includes world writeable files under /opt. Having said that however, I have no doubt that both OSes can be equally secured.

From a practical standpoint, being able to get HP to stand behind hpux is important if you're running critical apps. More important than the technical support is that they provide a scapegoat when things go wrong. :-)

From a management standpoint, hpux (and windows) is leaps and bounds beyond linux - glance is great and third-party apps like Unicenter are able to pull a LOT more data out of hpux than you can find in a month's worth of work in Linux. What process was consuming most of the cpu at 3am? This may be partially because the virtual memory management and scheduling were so in flux during the 2.4 linux kernel series that no one wanted to try hooking into it with a management tool, but it's extremely frustating.
Hockey PUX?
Michael Steele_2
Honored Contributor

Re: linux & hp-ux differences?

Oops, typo under 'LINUX O/S Loaders'

"...You can network boot from 'lilo',..."

should be

"...You CAN'T network boot from 'lilo',..."

(* FLAME ON! *)
Support Fatherhood - Stop Family Law