UNIX vs. LINUX

[Clara Rowe]

Hello experts! I would like your opinions/experiences/advise on this. We recently had an Oracle advisor review our systems. One of the recommendations was that we move to LINUX. We are currently running our applications (mainly Oracle databases) using HPUX and AIX. I would appreciate your advise and will pass it along to my management for their consideration.

Thanx in advance.

Clara

[eran maor · Accepted solution]

Hi

so , i m from HP so i will not try to tell what is better , i think that the are both very good o.s to run oracle applic. , i think that the mean issue is cost safing when choosing linux .


first HP also support linux on itanium prosessor so the reason shuold not be hardware .

the mean issue is how much critical is your mashine , on system that i will not considor as critical it is o.k to run it on linux , because in linux you can choose diff. software to install .

but in critical system , i think that it is better to have the support of hp for problem and know issue of running oracle applic.
i didnt do any test on linux system that i can tell you my view on performance issue so i will let other linux guru to tell you this

[S.K. Chan]

My question is what were the reasons for the recommendation to move to Linux ? Are they cost , performance, high-avilability, reliability, etc, etc ? My personal opinion, Linux is great, in fact we're moving that direction for end-user boxes but I do not know how good it is as a server platform, especially Oracle DB server. Other flavors of Unix like HPUX outweighs Linux in these areas at least ..
- OS reliability.
- Filesystem performance and management.
- Security.
Linux is excellent because of its low maintenance and low cost structure. It definately wins when it comes to replacing a desktop functionality but in the server arena, it's not quite there yet. This is again just my opinion.

[Clara Rowe]

Thank you for your response. Maybe I shouldn't have put this under "HPUX General", but I want the opinions of Unix Guru's that have worked with LINUX. I see what you mean about support, and that is a good point.

Thanx again.

Clara

[Pete Randall]

I've played with Linux and ran it on my laptop for a while. We also use it for some webhosting and some image processing here. It's OK, but in my opinion, for a commercial grade server system, it doesn't hold a candle to HP-UX. The administration effort seems much higher. Where HP-UX is bundled and tested together as a whole, Linux is an assembly of various parts which may or may not work well together. The hardware platform is inconsistent, you're constantly searching for the latest drivers for this, that, or the other thing, frankly, it's a pain.

Ultimately Linux will probably be much better, but to me, at this point in time, I wouldn't even consider trusting my database to it.

[Volker Borowski]

Clara,

a big point indeed is the entire architecture.
Todays "UNIX" is mostly running on 64-bit hardware with a full 64-bit operation system (even finally with AIX Release 5 :-) and has quite some age running in this environment.

LINUX is widely spread, a really cheap solution, but mainly running in 32-bit environment on Intel-cpu-platform. Now there are limits in terms of memory addressing for a 32-bit operating system. Check carefully, if you have databases, that already have to deal with big amounts of memory (means 1,5+ GB), or from which you expect to do so within the next 24 months. If yes, I guess "downgrading" to a 32-bit architecture might be a problem.

...and of course, LINUX is going to become 64-bit soon, but until you have it fully aged in this environment, with reasonable numbers of installations in production, it will take some time, and I would not try to take chances and become beta-64bit-tester for my production environment.

This does NOT mean that Linux is NOT an option, but I'd recommend to analyze this precisely.

Volker

[Chris Vail]

Both Linux and HP-UX are great operating systems. You won't go wrong choosing either one. Your consultant pointed out how expensive and underpowered your AIX-based systems are--they are and always have been.
However, your consultant _may_ have steered you wrong. The question to ask yourself concerns what level of administrative support you expect from a vendor.
In the last few years, I've become "O/S agnostic", which means that I really don't care what version of Unix a system is on. Each has its advantages and disadvantage.
For example: the level of O/S support is, AFAICT, unmatched in the industry. They REALLY do have good people to support their systems. HP support is good, even pretty good, but IBM's is GREAT. It has to be since their systems are half as fast and cost twice as much as an equivalent HP or Sun system.
Now if you're willing to acquire a systems administrator (or have that talent already available) then you don't or won't need the overabundance of support that IBM offers.
Right now, the speed leader is H/P--especially at the upper end of the spectrum: the new RP 7400 series and the RP8400 series and especially the SuperDome. These are BLINDINGLY fast compared to an equivalent IBM offering. They're cheap compared to IBM, but cost a heckuva lot more than a Linux system.
Another good choice is Sun. Sun probably has the most support from Oracle and Veritas. Which means: when Oracle releases a patch or an upgrade, it comes out on Sun first, with HP and IBM shortly thereafter, and Linux almost never. Sadly, Sun is suffering financially, and hemorraging money, and the industry speculation is that they will be bought out by somebody--we guess Dell or IBM. They have really fast systems, and since they're desperate to make sales, they're offering GREAT prices these days.
Lastly is Linux. The advantage of this is its very, very low price. You can run it on commodity Intel based systems, and get some pretty good speed from it. The fastest computers in the world, SGI, runs on Linux. So its a good choice in some cases. But Oracle doesn't support it very well. Patches and upgrades come out for Oracle on Linux rarely if ever. I think that this will improve in the next few months/years. So right now, you have to have a lot of DBA talent to make Oracle work. This is also true for the Systems Administrator who is running Linux. That person needs support resources, which means you'll have to buy a maintenance contract from somebody--RedHat is biggest but there are many others. IBM is really pushing Linux these days, so you need to investigate a contract from them.
So the answer to you question has to depend on what internal and external support resources, as well as your budget plans. If you're happy with IBM, then stay with them. If you're so unhappy with them that you're willing to invest the time and money to make the change, then you won't do badly REGARDLESS of which vendor you choose. The rule is: "you get what you pay for". Linux is free, and the hardware is cheap, but that is EXACTLY what you get--something that is cheap and/or free. One way or t'other, you'll have to pay support costs.
For sheer speed: choose HP. For best support: IBM, for great price: Linux. Somewhere in the middle of those three is Sun.


Chris

[Clara Rowe]

Chris,
I wish I could give you 20 points! Thank you so much.

Clara

[Chris Vail]

Well, okay Clara--you can now give me another 10 Points! Its the best offer I've had all day. I'm working towards my Pharoh-ship. And every little bit helps.

Just FWIW: I'm getting an elderly c3000 workstation myself this week. It ONLY runs HP-ux, or Linux. My wife needs a scan station for her legal business, and I'll build out this machine to support an Epson scanner. HP doesn't support its own scanners on its own propeitary Unix version. Fortunately, Debian Linux runs on this hardware, and Epson supports some of its scanners on Linux. I suspect that configuring this thing will be tax all of my Wizardly skills, and use up what little Magikal Server Pixie Dust I have left over from this weekend's RP8400 install. If I weren't an experienced Unix administrator, I'd bite the bullet and purchase a Dell or Gateway machine with XP, and just get whatever scanner we could afford. But this machine is being offered to me very cheaply, and I'm looking forward to the challenge of making it all work together. It'll be a royal pain in the nether regions to make work, but I'll keep trying until it does exactly what I want it to.


Chris

[Clara Rowe]

You got it! And best of luck getting your new hat and on your "little" project.

Thanx again

Clara

P.S. Glad I didn't say it was worth 100 points!
;)

[Steven E. Protter]

I have used Oracle on both.

The procedure's and installation and configurations on Oracle's web site are not as good for Linux as they are for HP-UX.

Oracle has gone to great lengths to advertise that they support Linux and they do. They only support it on certain Linux distributions, an important factor to take into consideration.

Solaris is Oracle's biggest platform. They claim to have three tier one platforms and releases come out there first. That's Solaris, NT and HP-UX.

In general product releases and bug fixes come out in that order, with Linux lagging a few days sometimes weeks behind HP-UX.

OS support is an issue. Every time Oracle calls asking what they can do to provide better customer service, I tell them "...be more like HP."

Running on HP-UX puts a company behind you that takes responsibility and will exert maximum effort to keep the customer going. I only have a 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. Hardware contract, but on several occaisions when a problem could not be solved on time, hardware stayed up all night, even drove in at 3 a.m. to finish the fix.

I don't use Linux support, so I can't testify to that. If HP offers Linux support, use that, because they are the best. I fyou go for Linux, run on HP hardware under HP hardware and service contract.

Business Analyis. The licensing fees for Linux are lower than HP-UX and you can cluster intel servers together to get a lot of horsepower on Linux.

HP-UX on a number of occaisions been labeled themost reliable OS on the planet. I take that serioiusly, and favor HP-Ux over Linux for that reason.

My ten cents.

My experience. I have been doing HP-UX systems administration since 1996. Oracle since 2000. I have been doing Linux Systems Administration and running a NSP on Linux Red Hat(currently 7.3) for two years.

SEP

[Christopher Caldwell]

We use HP-UX in the core (database, application servers) and on the edge (web serving, e-mail, dns).

We're experimenting with Linux on the edge (web serving, e-mail, dns).

One of the biggest deficiencies of Linux is hardware. The mainstream hardware is simply not engineered like the RISC boxes. Boot drive software mirroring (a la MirrorDisk/UX) isn't trivial. Apparently, multipath over fiber (i.e. redundant connections to a SAN) aren't supported (at least from a "vendor qualification" standpoint.

I'm not convinced that Linux is ready for the datacenter in the traditional sense.

Folks do put lots of Linux hosts out there (Google is rumored to have 50K Linux hosts), to get availability.
But the single host provisions for availability are simply not the same.

I'm not sure Linux is ready to scale yet, either. Basic RedHat Linux begins to lose linearity after two processors. Four processors is about the max you'll see for SMP. Because of 32 bit processors, you'll also see limitations for memory.

Summation:
Edge: [experimental]
Core: [Not Ready for Prime Time]

[Yogeeraj_1]

hi clara,

Moving to LINUX - is not just moving to LINUX - its moving a particular flavour of linux (E.g. Redhat)

I would prefer to perform a a thorough comparative analysis taking maintenance/support costs into consideration.

Linux is indeed very "attractive".

below a quote from this site: http://www.zdnet.com/filters/printerfriendly/0,6061,2907349-92,00.html


Product strategy and trajectory

The demand for Linux application servers--particularly databases--is soaring. The Oracle 9i databases running Linux and the Oracle Cluster File System for Linux solve a distinct and growing need for a robust, leading-edge database running on an open-source operating system that can be deployed on a variety of hardware platforms. It also simplifies the management of cluster databases.

Linux application servers are on a steep upward growth trajectory, estimated to be 20 percent a year. By 2007, the Linux application server market may reach $7 billion in annual sales. Oracle, IBM, Red Hat, and other Linux leaders are poised to grab both significant market share and revenue.

Other Oracle Linux offerings and initiatives include:

New Linux kernel technical enhancements by Oracle and Red Hat that improve Oracle 9i Real Application Clusters and deliver mainframe-like quality of service at a fraction of the cost.
Oracle's collaboration with Intel and Red Hat on the Open Source Infiniband implementation. Infiniband Architecture is an industry standard that defines a new high-speed, switched-fabric subsystem.


best regards
yogeeraj

[Sergejs Svitnevs]

Linux Redhat vs HP-UX:

http://bizforums.itrc.hp.com/cm/QuestionAnswer/1,,0x00f056bd90a9d611abdb0090277a778c,00.html

Regards,
Sergejs

[dirk dierickx]

A few weeks ago i read a quote somewhere on a debate between Linux vs Unix. One of the persons said the following:

Linux is stable and more flexible, Unix is more reliable.

and that sums it up in a few words. from where i stand i can only see linux being pushed back because of the reliability part. which is _not_ because of the OS, but more so for the hardware. (those intel boxes are just not on par with the big unix boys)

performance is blistering fast, we have done some real life benchmarks and we needed some powerfull HP machine to beat those figures.
people say scalability is such a big problem, but that depends on your needs. the fact is a lot of people are behind on current status, and will say it will do 2 cpu's but not more, maybe 4. The fact is that the scalability is good up to 8 cpu's and that is already a big enough machine in a lot of cases.

But, the most important part is to get skilled people. If you are not good or confident with it, you'll come back from a bad trip, but if your admin is a linux guru there should be no problems.
Support is another problem, while the OS support is good these days other support (like from oracle) might be lacking. ofcourse this will change as this whole linux thing is still pretty new (for the corporations)

[W.C. Epperson]

After running Oracle on everything from OS/2 (5.1.A beta site) to SCO to hp-ux 11.04 (Virtual Vault), I can say that integrated support is a critical factor given the complexity of Oracle. I can't get a single hardware/software support vendor to take accountability for both platform and OS in a Linux environment. In Linux and other Intel-based Unix-flavor platforms, I've always had issues of OS vendor pointing finger at server hardware vendor, who blamed the problem on a board and/or the folks who wrote the driver.... On my hp-ux platforms, we call the Response Center and say "It's an HP system. Fix it.". Linux can be particularly dicey with Oracle because Oracle's picky about which versions they support.

OTOH, every "generic" TCP/IP application layer service here has been ported to Linux (SMTP, DNS, NTP, etc.). Since the services tend to be native to the OS, integrated hw/sw support is not so much of an issue; in fact we can readily clone a new server from parts laying around if necessary.

[Clara Rowe]

Thank you one and all. I am forwarding your replies to my management. I'm sure they will take your advise to heart.

No more replies, please.

Thanx again

Clara

[Donald Kok]

Hi Clara,

There are 2 reasons to go to linux: money and fun.

- It can save lots of money. We investigated some arithmetic cluster with an ingres database. linux was 6 times cheaper than hp-ux. (that was only purchase costs, not maintaince)
- fun: it's always fun to learn a new OS.

There's one reason NOT to go to linux. It is not as stable. On the other hand, our building burned out, 2 months ago. The deliverytime for the linux machines was much shorter then for the hpux's ;-)

HTH
Donald

[John Meissner]

My company (M&M Mars) recently decided to delv into the Linux platform. Our main reasons for this were cost and ... well.... cost.

We found that we could save over 50% on TOC (total ownership cost) which is a good thing. We tested IBM's x360 servers with SLES7 (SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 7) running SAP. We found that the Linux server not only was MUCH cheaper but also that it performed better than our HP-UX servers running the same database. I personally prefer Red Hat ... And Red Hat has partnered with Oracle and has specific kernel improvements that are supposed to increase the performance of Oracle (using Red Hat Advanced Server). We bought 13 IBM servers and will probably be purchasing more in the future. We're also looking at the HP blade technology for future implementations.

[John Bolene]

I will have to say that running on the same hardware (C110), HPUX is faster than Debian Linux.

Not a lot but it is noticable, I would estimate about 20%.
Applications such as apache run just a bit faster under HPUX popping up the web pages.