Originally posted by kraftman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Netbook Performance: Ubuntu vs. OpenSolaris
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by nanonyme View PostTechnically only so far. Distros are known to remove and change stuff in kernels they use. (Sometimes causing more issues, sometimes fixing something. It's not like they'd be perfect anyway but my point was, it happens. The code is opensourced, it's not like there's Linus' Gestapo guarding you use it like he wants to. As long as you abide GPL, you can do pretty much anything you want with it)Last edited by kraftman; 14 August 2009, 08:47 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostI have a double Masters, one in comp sci and one in math. I understand more things than you do.
No, it doesnt work that way. Linus has control over the kernel. He might as well introduce some code that makes the kernel have problem with the non official distro. If he does that all the time, then there will be to much trouble and everyone will change to his distro.
SUN has the same position. There are lots of Solaris distros now: OpenSolaris, Belenix (which is Ubuntu environment but with the Solaris kernel + ZFS + DTrace + etc), Milax, Korona, Aurorax, Schillix, etc etc etc. If someone needs Solaris distro, which distro do they choose, you think? SUN's distro or some random person's distro? There are lots of forks, and all companies will choose the official distro: OpenSolaris. No other company can come and fork OpenSolaris and make a fortune, because SUN owns Solaris.
But Linux is ok. There is no official Linux distro. Anyone can make a distro, and companies can buy which Linux distro they want. There is no THE one and only Linux distro. This is the reason Linux is successfull. Money drives it all.
Of course you are biased. I am biased. Everyone is biased. As soon as you state some opinion, you take a bias. Only ignorant people say they are not biased.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kraftman View PostNow I see, I don't have to say a single word more. You didn't understand even this I didn't agree to what Linus said, so why your logic told you something opposite? If it works this way it's just enough to deny what you were talking about to see how it is in real. You ignored proof which unmask your, Frantaylor's and Sun's lies. There's also explanation:
I write: "... according to one of the greatest scientists ever, it is pure chance that directs evolution. Pure probability..."
And you:
"I'm according to what Linus said. It was in Linux context, so probability? Btw. ask yourself about probability of this chance. Of course, there are some theories which can help, but I don't buy it..."
Which I dont really understand. "I'm according to what Linux said"? What do you mean? And then you write "It was in Linux context, so probability? ask yourself about probability of this chance" - which chance? I can not read your mind. I actually dont understand what you are trying to say here. Do you mean that there is a low probability that Linux would have evolved to this stage if it were only by random choice? I dont understand. Let me repeat that again: I can not read your mind. Be clearer.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostI only saw Solaris advertisements when comes to such things and it seems it's just propaganda.
The Domain So, at the $DAYJOB, we were faced with building a large operational data store. Large has many meanings to many people. I’ve written about this before, but I’ll reiterate the scope: (> 1TB data, thousands of tables, several tables with around one billion rows). So, for a variety of reasons, we chose PostgreSQL. I’ve written about that choice a few times, but didn’t write about the choice to use Solaris.
Is this SUN advertisement?
I am frequently asked by potential customers with high I/O requirements if they can use Linux instead of AIX or Solaris.No one ever asks me about
Has SUN written this?
And this?
Do you want more links? Where did you see "only" Solaris advertisements and propaganda, in my links? You know, most people would say that these links are real life stories. Not SUN advertisements.
I have a question. A) Where did you see "only" SUN advertisements?
Originally posted by kraftman View PostThe reason why you have problems with my logic is very clear - you're just dumb. I cleared some thing few times, but you don't get it. Person with average intelligence shouldn't have a single problem with understanding me.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostHow that's possible you're so dumb? You started talking about some problems and now you're asking? Do you expect I'll explain you a single word, because it seems you've got problems with obvious things and if you're talking nonsenses it's ok?[B] This what problem.
And also, I CAN NOT READ YOUR MIND. Please spell it out. Your english is not good. Your logic is wrong. Your thinking is wrong. I understand almost nothing about what you are trying to say. And I CAN NOT READ YOUR MIND.
I wrote: Yes, but facts/claims doesnt change.
You wrote: So, you should worry...
Why should I worry? For what? Let me say that again: I CAN NOT READ YOUR MIND. BE CLEARER.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostI just did you a favor, because I noticed you started trolling and I wanted to tell you you're wrong. I believed you don't want to be shamed, but it seems you don't care
Originally posted by kraftman View PostNope, Solaris is a mess, but dead one.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostIt's not bug free and it's old pile of crap right now. Call it mature if you want.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostYou ignored the most important thing in my response:
http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/cgi-bin/blog.cgi/2007/04/10#bonwick_scalability
I'll repeat. It unmasks Sun's propaganda and it shows this company is just bunch of cowards and maggots. Die as "sun" as possible
For the other link, about Bonwick talking about Linux scaling bad - well that is a fact. Linux scales bad. It is not FUD or lies. Linus scaling experts admit that Linus v2.4 scales bad on Big Iron. And you know, it takes decades to scale well. Linux v2.6 can impossibly scale well. Maybe Linux v 6-7 can scale well on Big Iron.
And also, you posted a link that showed that Linux scales bad. So how can Bonwick be FUDing? Even YOUR link showed that Linux scaled bad! Is your own link FUD???
Originally posted by kraftman View PostI assure you and some other idiots I won't let such FUD to be spread :>
You have no links that shows that Linux scales well. If you want to debunk the FUD, then you should show proofs that support you. That you are correct. Right? Then I will get convinced.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostYou didn't read. Few years. Linux has RCU and that's why performance and scalling is much better then on Solaris.
If RCU is soo good for Linux, why does Linux scale bad on Big Iron, then? Admittedly, Linux scales well on large clusters, maybe because of RCU?
Anyway, RCU or not, Linux sucks on Big Iron. But scales well on clusters.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostPerformance and stability is something why they run Linux instead of such crap.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostI don't care what you think I just won't let you spred FUD. If someone's and idiot why should I care what he thinks? Your links are jokes and link which I gave eliminates them as "proofs". I gave you some very valuable links.
Regarding your "valuable links", please do not show links on some guy having problems on installing ancient Solaris v8 - as a proof that Solaris is unstable on large systems. Please show me some real life testimonies. Do not show me a feature list or whatever.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostP.S. Don't fool yourself by talking about Tannenbaum.
Ok, now you will face the problems I have with you. What do I mean when I write like this?
"Yes I know but I am correct on Tannenbaum, and your second argument is flawed"
Tell me what I mean. Go ahead. Tell me what I mean. What do I mean? I am easy to understand, yes?
And one thing, please answer my questions A, B and C. I am waiting eagerly.Last edited by kebabbert; 17 August 2009, 07:53 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apopas View PostWell, if for some reason something goes wrong with the official kernel, then each distro will remove or fix the parts they don't like. Also, even now 99% of the distros use their patched/fixed kernels and not the official one that Torvalds releases. They have freedom fortunately. And as long as they keep giving the services they used to do to their customers, then the users will stay to their distro till they find something that meets their needs better of course.
Originally posted by Apopas View PostOriginally posted by kebabbert View PostOf course you are biased. I am biased. Everyone is biased. As soon as you state some opinion, you take a bias. Only ignorant people say they are not biased.
I talked to some guy, he said:
-I have no opinion on this, I just remark that X is better than Y.
-But then you have an opinion! That statement is a opinion. You are subjective!
-No no no, I have no opinion! I just remark that X is better than Y! I am not subjective, I am objective!
-But THAT is an opinion! You HAVE taken a bias! You are subjective!
-Nononono
etc. It took 15 minutes before he understood that he really was subjective. You should study philosophy if you believe that you have no bias. You are wrong on this.
It is like when some girl says:
-You and I share nothing in common
-But you are wrong on this, then we share one thing in common: That we have nothing in common!
Ergo, you can never say to anyone that you have nothing in common. Dumb girl to not understand that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostWell I am not convinced on this. If Linus T releases the official Linux distro, then I believe everyone will switch to the official distro. I do not believe customers will stay on some inferior Linux distro. Linus T own distro will get the hottest newest tech, and all other distros will lag behind.
I do not speak for myself. If you dont believe you are biased then you should reconsider. That is wrong thinking from you. You ARE biased as soon you state an opinion.
I talked to some guy, he said:
-I have no opinion on this, I just remark that X is better than Y.
-But then you have an opinion! That statement is a opinion. You are subjective!
-No no no, I have no opinion! I just remark that X is better than Y! I am not subjective, I am objective!
-But THAT is an opinion! You HAVE taken a bias! You are subjective!
-Nononono
etc. It took 15 minutes before he understood that he really was subjective. You should study philosophy if you believe that you have no bias. You are wrong on this.
It is like when some girl says:
-You and I share nothing in common
-But you are wrong on this, then we share one thing in common: That we have nothing in common!
Ergo, you can never say to anyone that you have nothing in common. Dumb girl to not understand that.
You should study philosophy if you believe that you have no bias. You are wrong on this.
Also, a friendly advice since I don't know you and I get no benefit if you accept it or not:
If you want people, especially the ones that don't know you at all (like us here) to take you seriously, stop posting things like your personal achievements in the universities, your masters and your scores in mensa club. They are sayings that proves nothing more than some level of arrogance which does not help at all any debates we have here.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apopas View PostIn my previous post I said exactly the same, that everyone is gonna use Torvald's distro if it proves that it's better and not just because he is Torvalds. But again he is just one guy, Redhat, Novell, Canonical, the community and all the other distributions on the other hand have millions of developers. So the chances are totally against him.
Originally posted by Apopas View PostAlso, a friendly advice since I don't know you and I get no benefit if you accept it or not:
If you want people, especially the ones that don't know you at all (like us here) to take you seriously, stop posting things like your personal achievements in the universities, your masters and your scores in mensa club. They are sayings that proves nothing more than some level of arrogance which does not help at all any debates we have here.
If he hits me, and I hit back - you ask ME why I hit him. Great.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostSo you mean that others would hijack and fork off the Linux kernel?? I dont think so. If Linus T releases THE official Linux distro, then everyone will switch to it, I believe. His devs will follow him and they will support the official Linux distro. What will RedHat etc do? Will they fight and fork of the kernel? I dont think so. Too much job to maintain another kernel. And all Linux people will rather use Linus kernel, than any other. I suspect.
Ah, great. Have you ever wondered WHY I was forced to post such information? Was it because someone attacked me by saying I was dumb, understood nothing, has intelligence less than average, etc etc etc? So in order to defend myself, I merely stated facts about myself. Instead of telling someone else to calm down, you support him and give "advice" to ME. Maybe you should give advice to him???? But no. Great.
If he hits me, and I hit back - you ask ME why I hit him. Great.Last edited by Apopas; 17 August 2009, 12:33 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostSo you mean that others would hijack and fork off the Linux kernel?? I dont think so. If Linus T releases THE official Linux distro, then everyone will switch to it, I believe. His devs will follow him and they will support the official Linux distro.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostForgive me for saying this, but your english is not the best. I admit my english is not perfect either, but I have a hard time understanding your text.
I write: "... according to one of the greatest scientists ever, it is pure chance that directs evolution. Pure probability..."
And you:
"I'm according to what Linus said. It was in Linux context, so probability? Btw. ask yourself about probability of this chance. Of course, there are some theories which can help, but I don't buy it..."
Which I dont really understand. "I'm according to what Linux said"? What do you mean? And then you write "It was in Linux context, so probability? ask yourself about probability of this chance" - which chance? I can not read your mind. I actually dont understand what you are trying to say here. Do you mean that there is a low probability that Linux would have evolved to this stage if it were only by random choice? I dont understand. Let me repeat that again: I can not read your mind. Be clearer.
Is this SUN advertisement? It is SUN that has written this?
http://lethargy.org/~jesus/writes/choosing-solaris-10-over-linux
Is this SUN advertisement?
I am frequently asked by potential customers with high I/O requirements if they can use Linux instead of AIX or Solaris.No one ever asks me about
Has SUN written this?
And this?
Do you want more links? Where did you see "only" Solaris advertisements and propaganda, in my links? You know, most people would say that these links are real life stories. Not SUN advertisements.
I have a question. A) Where did you see "only" SUN advertisements?
Have you ever considered the possibility that it is you that is dumb? I have intelligence far above average. I have tried the Mensa web test and emailed Mensa, and they replied that I have a very good chance to enter Mensa. If try the real Mensa test and enter Mensa, then I am more intelligent than ~95% of all people. Can you say the same thing? Maybe the reason I have problems following your logic is not because of me (I have far above average IQ and have studied logic at the university) maybe the problem is that you have not studied logic? Maybe you should do that?
You dont have to call me ugly names, right? We are grown up people. I hope.
And also, I CAN NOT READ YOUR MIND. Please spell it out. Your english is not good. Your logic is wrong. Your thinking is wrong. I understand almost nothing about what you are trying to say. And I CAN NOT READ YOUR MIND.
I wrote: Yes, but facts/claims doesnt change.
You wrote: So, you should worry...
Why should I worry? For what? Let me say that again: I CAN NOT READ YOUR MIND. BE CLEARER.
That was nice to not ashame me, but I dont care because I am interested to learn more. If you really have good links showing that I am wrong, please post them!
Question B) How do you know that the Solaris code is a mess? Can you back that claim up? You have several times said that Solaris becomes unstable under large load, and never showed such links. Whereas I have showed links. Can you show links, or can you not?
Of course Solaris kernel is not bug free. Have I claimed that, somewhere??? If you claim it is a pile of crap, then prove it. Show links that Solaris kernel have problems with stability and scalability. If you can not show such links, then you are wrong. Do you agree? If you want to claim that you are correct, then you must prove that you are correct. That sounds reasonable? Where are your proofs? Links?
If you can not show such links, then you are wrong.
No, I did not ignore your link. I answered that link. I wrote: "Linux claims to run on 1024 cpu machine, but how well does it run? And such a machine is only used for number crunching - it is not used as big iron server where lots of users login och do office work. And number crunching is easy to do. Server workload is much more difficult, because it is general work...
For the other link, about Bonwick talking about Linux scaling bad - well that is a fact. Linux scales bad. It is not FUD or lies. Linus scaling experts admit that Linus v2.4 scales bad on Big Iron. And you know, it takes decades to scale well. Linux v2.6 can impossibly scale well. Maybe Linux v 6-7 can scale well on Big Iron.
And also, you posted a link that showed that Linux scales bad. So how can Bonwick be FUDing? Even YOUR link showed that Linux scaled bad! Is your own link FUD???
Ok, fine. But then you should have evidence? Proofs? Links that show that Linux scales well on Big Iron? Where are them links? You have showed some benchmarks on a 32 CPU machine - but that is not proof that Linux scales well in GENERAL, on every workload. And you showed a discussion about Linux on 1024 CPU machine - but how well does it run Linux? Maybe Linux sucks on that machine? There are no links on that. You have only showed that Linux compiles on a 1024 cpu machine and that you have showed that there are performance problems on that 1024 CPU machine - which the discussion is about.
There are no links on that. You have only showed that Linux compiles on a 1024 cpu machine and that you have showed that there are performance problems on that 1024 CPU machine - which the discussion is about.
I told you, RCU is no guarantee that it works well. I can say that a car has a special kind of super engine, but maybe it is not well implemented? Maybe the car is crap, but uses a good engine? If Linux uses RCU, it does not prove anything. Maybe Linux implementation of RCU is crap?Last edited by kraftman; 19 August 2009, 03:41 AM.
Comment
Comment