Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Solaris 11 Struggles Against Linux Distributions

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Solaris 11 Struggles Against Linux Distributions

    Phoronix: Solaris 11 Struggles Against Linux Distributions

    For some interesting benchmarks to share before the start of the weekend, here's some recent test results conducted at Phoronix that's comparing Oracle Solaris 11 Express, Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, CentOS 6.2, Debian GNU/kFreeBSD Wheezy, and Fedora 17.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17607

  • #2
    Linux didn't kill Solaris

    Solaris struggles against Linux, but it wasn't Linux that killed Solaris - it was Oracle.

    Solaris could stand by its own merit. It was backed by a huge technology company (Sun Microsystems), it had the world's most advanced file system, it had great technology such as DTrace, etc.
    It was active and had great community participation through OpenSolaris.

    Sun was highly regarded in the technical community due to being a huge supporter of open source. Java, OpenSolaris, NetBeans, OpenOffice, VirtualBox and lots of other software. Not to mention open source hardware through the OpenSPARC project.

    Then Oracle comes a long, buys Sun and manages to fuck every single thing up.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by uid313 View Post
      Then Oracle comes a long, buys Sun and manages to fuck every single thing up.
      +sideways fucking 8

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by uid313 View Post
        Solaris struggles against Linux, but it wasn't Linux that killed Solaris - it was Oracle.
        No, it was Linux. This is the reason why SUN is dead. Oracle just bought a dead horse, but what's more important they were mainly interested in java not in Solaris.

        Comment


        • #5
          Solaris struggles against Linux, but it wasn't Linux that killed Solaris - it was Oracle.
          Really? The Solaris guys are still in denial? Go take a look at the stock price graphs. Sun was over long before Oracle came along. Not that I am defending Oracle in any way or form.

          The story seems to tie performance to stricktly to the compiler with out taking any thing else into consideration. It would also help if we knew what each of the tests was actually testing.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jvillain View Post
            The story seems to tie performance to stricktly to the compiler with out taking any thing else into consideration. It would also help if we knew what each of the tests was actually testing.
            This is true. For instance, the FreeBSD kernel in Debian is compiled with -O1, which hurts performance.

            Comment


            • #7
              I still wonder from time to time what would've happened if the OpenSolaris code had been released as GPLv3 as some rumors had speculated.
              Solaris had some interesting tech in it, but overall it was very hardware-limited. You had to basically buy hardware for it. Linux was already miles ahead of it in that regard.

              Any chance Solaris had to shine is long gone. Oracle was just the final nail in the coffin.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ryao View Post
                This is true. For instance, the FreeBSD kernel in Debian is compiled with -O1, which hurts performance.
                And kfreebsd in FreeBSD is optimized with what flag?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  And kfreebsd in FreeBSD is optimized with what flag?
                  It uses -O2 with GCC 4.2.y. You can compile it with Clang for a performance boost.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The SciMark Monte Carlo results look suspicious. All that should be doing is drawing random numbers and it wouldn't be using OS-features like cryptographic random devices to do so either.

                    Why is Linux (CentOS) performing substantially worse than Linux (Ubuntu)?

                    The Solaris results are also unusual in that it performs poorly on tests that have nothing to do with the OS. I'd be really curious about performance if benchmarks were compiled by suncc. However, that wouldn't be a fair comparison.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Comparing 32bit Solaris app code to 64bit Linuxs is not fair!

                      Hi,
                      just to defend Solaris a little bit. This OS's gcc compiler by *default* produces 32bit applications even on amd64 hosts and even Solaris 11 is 64bit. On the other hand majority of Linux distros for amd64 are pure 64bit which means also their gcc compilers produce 64bit apps. As amd64 is way much better in perfromance than pure old x86 I would really strongly recommend to rerun the benchmarks and enforce 64bit app compilation on solaris by using `-m64' switch. Nothing more is needed.
                      Thanks!
                      Karel

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by BlueJayofEvil View Post
                        I still wonder from time to time what would've happened if the OpenSolaris code had been released as GPLv3 as some rumors had speculated.
                        Solaris had some interesting tech in it, but overall it was very hardware-limited. You had to basically buy hardware for it. Linux was already miles ahead of it in that regard.

                        Any chance Solaris had to shine is long gone. Oracle was just the final nail in the coffin.
                        Yeah, and wonder what would happen if it was under released under the Linux-compatible GPLv2 license, or the 2-clause BSD license or ISC license.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          suspicious indeed

                          Originally posted by nslay View Post
                          The SciMark Monte Carlo results look suspicious. All that should be doing is drawing random numbers and it wouldn't be using OS-features like cryptographic random devices to do so either.

                          Why is Linux (CentOS) performing substantially worse than Linux (Ubuntu)?

                          The Solaris results are also unusual in that it performs poorly on tests that have nothing to do with the OS. I'd be really curious about performance if benchmarks were compiled by suncc. However, that wouldn't be a fair comparison.
                          I agree, that did look odd. I also would like to add, why is Fedora noticeably lower than Ubuntu? The gap seems suspicious or perhaps biased, unless of course it's a regression/bug caused by GCC 4.7.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Flawed Test Results

                            Hi, these tests results are flawed. Solaris is using ZFS in these tests, so to accurately compare it with other Linux distributions you would have to partition the Solaris filesystems with UFS or change the Linux distributions to use BTRFS. ZFS is known to be slower than UFS due to software RAID checksums but gives you a lot more flexibility (snapshots and repartitioning) and redundancy.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I was getting behind the whole OpenSolaris thing... there are a *few* cool features such as crossbow Sun was starting to develop in the open.

                              However Oracle and their general taint made me drop all interest pretty quickly.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X