Oracle Might Be Canning Solaris

[eggbert]

Everything Oracle touches turns to crap - OpenOffice, MySQL, Java, NetBeans, VirtualBox, Solaris. It seems as if Oracle's only real focus is locking in their customers to their crummy database software.

[ldo17]

... what advantages does Solaris have over other Unix-like operating system families?

It’s a holdover from the days of the “Unix wars”. Before Linux became dominant, there were all these vendors offering competing systems, all using the “Unix” branding. But in terms of compatibility, they tried to offer the bare minimum to comply with that branding. Beyond that they tried to pack in proprietary features, precisely so that customers would find it hard to move away from one vendor’s platform onto another officially “Unix” platform supposedly based on common “open standards”. Yup, you thought vendor lock-in with Microsoft was bad, now imagine that multiplied by 10.

The strategy worked for a few years (lots of profit), but in the long term it killed Unix.

[pal666]

For that matter, also CentOS is a RHEL clone, and Red Hat is 100% fine with that

centos is in fact owned by redhat, but oracle is slightly different matter

[pal666]

Does ZFS work even better in its native operating system than it does on BSD-based OSes?

i am pretty sure bsds lag many versions behind, but who needs zfs anyway, it was made obsolete by btrfs

[Marc Driftmeyer]

Everything Oracle touches turns to crap - OpenOffice, MySQL, Java, NetBeans, VirtualBox, Solaris. It seems as if Oracle's only real focus is locking in their customers to their crummy database software.

Because Java, Netbeans and MySQL were great? VirtualBox is better today than it was before they bought SUN Microsystems.

[boxie]

i am pretty sure bsds lag many versions behind, but who needs zfs anyway, it was made obsolete by btrfs

trolololololol!

[funfunctor]

Full disclosure; I worked a little on ZFS's code base.

The Linux kernel desperately needs a GPL'ed ZFS implementation. BTRFS isn't comparable at all in production, its more of a toy frankly. So either ZFS gets GPL'ed and Oracle tries to make amends for its absolutely stupid strategy with OpenSolaris or XFS improvements are currently the only real path we have. XFS is currently the best file system mainline currently supports for production environments, by quite a long shot.

[liam]

+1 for hoping that ZFS and perhaps Dtrace (if it still has an advantage) comes properly to Linux.

DTrace? No.

http://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2016-10-27/dtrace-for-linux-2016.html

Even ZFS isn't really needed.

Solaris does have some features I'd like LInux to have, though, but I not aware of any that would be easy to bring over (even assuming solaris was re-licensed).

[funfunctor]

DTrace? No.

http://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2016-10-27/dtrace-for-linux-2016.html

Even ZFS isn't really needed.

Solaris does have some features I'd like LInux to have, though, but I not aware of any that would be easy to bring over (even assuming solaris was re-licensed).

That is interesting thanks for pointing it out ! I disagree with not needing ZFS though, we definitely need it big time!

[danboid]

I'm showing my ignorance here, but what advantages does Solaris have over other Unix-like operating system families? I use both Linux and BSD and can see ups and downs to both of them, but I really have no idea what Solaris offers that the others don't. OpenZFS works well for me on FreeBSD, although it seems to take a performance hit on Linux (even ignoring license issues). Does ZFS work even better in its native operating system than it does on BSD-based OSes? Is there some other feature Solaris has that I'm not aware of that makes it worth using?

ZFS mainly. (Open)solaris is the original upstream of ZFS. I dunno what the penalty is but FreeBSD (like Linux) has to use Solaris compat. daemon to use ZFS.

I looked into Illumos etc recently but lost interest when I learned it doesn't support USB3 nor does it even boot on my mini ATX. Illumos' hardware support is miles behind FreeBSD, nevermind Linux.