I need to give a presentation on the benefits of AIX vs Solaris.
Can everyone share your thoughts. Keep in mind that I`m not looking
to dismiss either platform, I think they both work very well with
specific databases,
storage and apps. Thoughts please!
Thanks

racman wrote:
I need to give a presentation on the benefits of AIX vs Solaris.
Can everyone share your thoughts. Keep in mind that I`m not looking
to dismiss either platform, I think they both work very well with
specific databases, storage and apps.

AIX doesn't require a 3rd party FS to operate and bare-metal restores
are very easy and it's stable. They have big chunk of the
"big" unix host market and almost all of the supercomputer market.
To be read "lots of scalability".

Solaris typically requires a Veritas FS license to play in the big iron
arena, bare-metal restores are, at best, problematic. They have a large
presence in the smaller/scientific/engineering market. The E10K was
vastly overpriced piece of dung and the E25K seems little more promising.

To be read "yeah, you can throw hardware at it, but it's a lot of pain."

In addition, Solaris 10 is IMH a PS. Many of the commands and conf
files have changed, so it requires staff to be retrained. Their
implementation of containers etc. is sort of dicey and confusing
and who was the bright boy who decided to implement the .conf files
using xml?

Plus, Sun indicates that they have even more changes coming. That is,
it's not stable and isn't going to be for quite some time. Sun
decides it's going with something, they tend to do it irregardless of
customer feedback or reality (e.g., openwin).

You might want to add Linux to the mix

In article <44bfc1d4@news.uni-ulm.de>, Volker Birk <bumens@dingens.orgwrites:
|base60 <nobody@whitehouse.comwrote:
|Solaris typically requires a Veritas FS license to play in the big iron
|arena
|>
|You don't seem to know Solaris very well:

AIX :-) Push either hard or use them in unusual ways and they both
misbehave. So does Linux, and probably everything else.

|To be read "lots of scalability".

|The E10K was
|vastly overpriced piece of dung and the E25K seems little more promising.
|>
|*bla*

The F15K beat the living daylights out of the PWER4 Regatta in terms of
scalability - the individual CPUs of the PWER4 may have been several
times faster than the SPARCs, but a F15K was several times faster than a
Regatta when running all CPUs flat out on realistic codes.

I have not used a PWER5, which I believe is much better.

Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

My apologies in advance. I know it's off-topic
followups should go to alt.angst

Mea culpa. Mea culpa. Mea culpa.

Volker Birk wrote:
base60 <nobody@whitehouse.comwrote:
>Solaris typically requires a Veritas FS license to play in the big iron
>arena
>
You don't seem to know Solaris very well:

of curiosity I checked, it's again being shipped on Sol10 as
of the end of June the last 20 days or so. Forgive me for being
dated :)

Given its record of available/not/available/not, I think I'll
wait a bit.

>
>bare-metal restores are, at best, problematic.
>
Nonsense. Everybody who has clue of UNIX knows, what to implement to
setup bare boxes with just dd. Beside the managed solutions, of course:

Yes. dd. My point precisely.

That works fine if you're restoring to exactly the same hardware.
Try taking that to Sungard etc. and getting it loaded. Rotsa ruck.

Sorry, solaris is the worst of the lot for bare-metal restores for major
vendors.

Yeah, we have an "enterprise backup" solution for Solaris it's K
if you're talking about user data.

>
>They have a large
>presence in the smaller/scientific/engineering market.
>
Yes. And at universities and at TelCos and

Agreed.

>
>The E10K was
>vastly overpriced piece of dung and the E25K seems little more promising.
>
*bla*

Better let's talk about a bunch of dual dual-core pizza boxes
:-P

Sun gave us a couple to play with. If you have something that threads
well, you'll probably like it.

>
>Many of the commands and conf
>files have changed, so it requires staff to be retrained.
>
Sincere condolences if you or your staff are not able to read a manual.

Red Herring. The point was that it isn't stable and probably won't be
anytime soon.

Since there is substantial retraining involved, one may as well consider
other alternatives as well.

>
>You might want to add Linux to the mix
>
GNU/Linux is a good topic, though ;-) But we better should not discuss
this in an UNIX group :-P

LL :-)

Yeah, as it is, it's flame-bait. Apologies above.

Really, I had to work in projects with at least Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, SC
UNIX, FreeBSD, BSD, NetBSD, MS X, Debian GNU/Linux, SuSE Linux,
Mandrake Linux, Redhat Linux, True64 and it's antecessor Digital Unix,
Irix, and some not so common ones I don't want to mention, and I must say,
that AIX, HP-UX and Solaris nearly are playing in the same league (with
True64 and Irix perhaps), while SX in many points is somewhat strange but
interesting, and the GNU/Linux variants are all mature and stable now.
nicer to have.

"Nearly".

Yes, although similar, as indicated, they do have their own niches.

The BSDs of course are BSDs (with the exception of MS X ;-), what
shell I say? ;-)

BTW: to learn to know a new *NIX, just read /etc/inittab or /etc/rc,
and then read the forked scripts ;-)

Especially, if you're comparing AIX to Solaris, then the advantages or
disadvantages are sophisticated.

Yesyes, SAM ist great. course. was it called SMIT? Ah, f*ck off,

LL :)

smitty or smit

the one and only *NIX setup tool is called "vi". Hm or was this
"vim"?

Given the .xml format that Sun has decided to use for their Sol 10 .conf
files, you'd better hope for a nice Win-type GUI :-)

What were they thinking?