__/ [ yttrx ] on Wednesday 23 August 2006 14:57 \__
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Fresh Rumors Erupt over Red Hat-Oracle Buy
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | "Well, wouldn't it be much less expensive for Oracle to create its
>> | own community distribution? [They could spend] 50 percent [of what it
>> | would cost to buy Red Hat] and go buy Novell and use SUSE as the
>> | Oracle-Linux distribution.
>> |
>> | "Probably even cheaper to throw a billion at the problem and go find
>> | a third-tier Linux distribution and hire the team and deploy an
>> | Oracle enterprise Linux."
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2007220,00.asp
>
> This is idiocy on oracle's part.
>
> 1. Anyone whos running oracle in any sort of serious way is NOT running
> it on linux, because linux simply lacks the stability of big-iron UNIX
> under very, very heavy i/o. Don't argue with me on this one--its a fact,
> and I know it from first hand experience. Oracle on linux is fine for
> light and medium-duty applications, but the moment you get into databases
> hundreds of gigs large, containing tens of millions of records and
> dealing with a hundred operations a second or more, you use something
> other than linux.
> 2. Anyone whos bent on running oracle on linux isnt going to buy a big
> fancy version of linux from Oracle, when they can get a better, more
> developed version from pretty much anyone else.
>
> 3. Oracle will run well on FreeBSD with linux binary emulation, by the
> way.
Still, 60% of Oracle's clients are using Linux and, according to a recent
survey, they were very satisfied with it. Oracle might be better off
(financially) embracing Linux and extending (for all else to use) until it
becomes as good as proprietary UNIX. I also doubt the validity of this
argument, but I'll give you all the benefit of my doubts/inexperience.
|
|