Everything in Solaris is virtualized. The network stack, cpu, everything. For instance, If you use Containers on Linux is the network stack virtualized? Is everything on Linux virtualized? Or only the Containers?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
A Quick Tour Of Oracle Solaris 11
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostEverything in Solaris is virtualized. The network stack, cpu, everything. For instance, If you use Containers on Linux is the network stack virtualized? Is everything on Linux virtualized? Or only the Containers?
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View Postso what exactly is the point? what does that offer that the real stuff can't? this is not a rhetorical question i'm legitimately wondering
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View Posti still want to know what exactly makes solaris a cloud os, what makes it so much better for virtualization, and what it has to offer over linux or free-bsd at this point.
Oracle doesn't screw around... They don't go after Amazon, Google, or Akamai, instead they go after the corporations and web companies that Google, Amazon and Akamai get there revenue from. Oracle tries to get those corps hooked on Oracle server support contracts which will cost those corps big money over very long periods of time.. Of course, Oracle doesn't present it that way, rather they present it as a solution that requires little to no staff and so it "saves money", but then if something does go wrong, needless to say, Oracle is always ready to send a whole bandwagon of "specialists" to your doorstep, each of which cost you $300/hr..
You'd be surprised how many corporate execs would rush to implement things like self-managing cloud hardware if they think it can cut down on their IT costs long term.. But they don't see the hidden Oracle consultation costs that always crop up when the company tries to grow or relocate. I've never seen a single company ever work with Oracle and NOT shot themselves in the foot in some way or another.
I don't have a problem with Solaris.. Never had... But Oracle.. Not good.. Even if they wave the Solaris banner... Not good...Last edited by Sidicas; 10 November 2011, 11:35 PM.
Comment
-
wow sidicas thanks for the info i never knew that the new solaris was this interesting. although i would find it very hard to find a practical use for it's ability in everyday purposes, i can see it's potential and it is now it FINALLY stands out.
what i really like about what you told me is now i feel solaris is it's own category, and i really like that because i'm tired of seeing "yet another desktop (or server) OS". i hope to see future development and improvements.
i don't really have much of a problem with oracle. they tend to have a very MS personality to them (meaning, if they can't figure out how to join the competition, they buy it out) but at least they're not big enough to slack off or abuse their power.
i'm still waiting for gpu passthrough for virtualbox and then i'm content.
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View Postwhat i really like about what you told me is now i feel solaris is it's own category, and i really like that because i'm tired of seeing "yet another desktop (or server) OS". i hope to see future development and improvements.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sidicas View Post... but nobody in their right mind would run it on a laptop with a single SSD over some of the lighter weight linux alternatives to ZFS..
Seriously though, I look at my colleagues who run Ubuntu on their Laptops and I glow with pride when I get to show off the power of Solaris on mine ... but the days that that happens are few and far between, and the Apps that just work in the Linux sphere make me feel like changing to Linux more each day.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sidicas View PostThe problem with virtualization on every OS besides the new Solaris is that you need to run an entire OS for each virtualization..
Comment
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostI dont think this is correct. Linux also has something similar to Containers, which means Linux does not need to run an entire OS if they use Containers. Also, IBM copied Solaris containers and the IBM copy is called WPAR (or LPAR). HP-UX have Containers since old. FreeBSD also have Containers, called Jails. But the other OSes dont virtualize everything, like the network stack that Solaris 11 have done.
I was going to mention this as well.
BTW, lpar is OLD. Predates solaris, and isn't containers. It is HARDWARE based OS partitioning, IIRC. Thus it is basically bomb-proof, but it has more overhead than os-level virtualization. WPAR is more like solaris containers, but, again, not exactly the same. Don't ask me what the difference is, I don't know.
Linux can virtualize the network stack (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/li...al-networking/).
If worse comes to worst, you can always virtualize EVERYTHING with k/qemu (kqemu is qemu with some additional kernel modules for speedups, though this might be merged with qemu now).
Of course this entails performance hits unless you enable paravirtual drivers.
Comment
-
Originally posted by liam View PostThanks, kebbart!
I was going to mention this as well.
BTW, lpar is OLD. Predates solaris, and isn't containers. It is HARDWARE based OS partitioning, IIRC. Thus it is basically bomb-proof, but it has more overhead than os-level virtualization.
WPAR is more like solaris containers, but, again, not exactly the same. Don't ask me what the difference is, I don't know.
Linux can virtualize the network stack (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/li...al-networking/).
If worse comes to worst, you can always virtualize EVERYTHING with k/qemu (kqemu is qemu with some additional kernel modules for speedups, though this might be merged with qemu now).
Of course this entails performance hits unless you enable paravirtual drivers.
Comment
Comment