Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

CowboyNeal Reviews Oracle Linux

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the read-all-about-it dept.

Oracle 170

CowboyNeal writes "Last week, Oracle announced that they were making Oracle Linux available free of charge, and also provided a script that makes switching to Oracle Linux nearly painless for existing CentOS users. What makes Oracle Linux unique, and why would anyone want to use it? Read on to find out, as I delve into what Oracle Linux has to offer."

What is Oracle Linux?

On its face, Oracle Linux feels like just another Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) derivative. It uses anaconda for an installer. It uses yum for handling packages. Configuration is handled just like RHEL, CentOS, or Scientific Linux. To be honest, the reasons why anyone would switch to Oracle Linux aren't immediately apparent after installing. It feels like nearly any other Linux with the Oracle name bolted on. Under the hood, however, are some rather compelling features.

The Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel

I have to start off with saying that I hate the name "Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel." I've seen enough crazy stuff in my time, to know that no software is truly unbreakable. It might be pretty good, but unbreakable is like calling the Titanic unsinkable. Given a poor enough captain, or in this case, an administrator, I don't have any doubts that the kernel could be broken in at least some fashion. However, I suppose that "Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel" sounds a lot better than the "Pretty-dang-tootin'-robust Enterprise Kernel," and with a target like enterprise customers, terms like "Pretty-dang-tootin'" just won't get stuffy execs to authorize using Oracle Linux.

With that off my chest, let's see what the Unbreakable Linux Kernel does have to offer. Oracle has added a number of their own enhancements into a Linux 2.6 kernel. These include networking optimizations, NUMA optimizations, and enhancements for OCFS2, asynchronous I/O, SSD disk access, OLTP, and more. They clearly work pretty well, as back in March, Oracle submitted a TPC-C benchmark for a Sun Fire server that was the fastest x64-based non-clustered system.

Ksplice: Update Your Kernel Without Rebooting

Ksplice was acquired by Oracle roughly a year ago, and as a result is married to Oracle Linux rather nicely. Ksplice is the holy grail for any administrator who is obsessed with uptime. It gives you the ability to update your kernel, with no downtime necessary. This is by far the best reason to use Oracle Linux, but it also comes at a steep price. While support for Ksplice is present in the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel, it does nothing without the Ksplice Uptrack service enabled.

How does one get Ksplice Uptrack? It's only included with an Oracle premier support contract. While Oracle is quick to note that it costs less than a similar-tier RHEL support contract, it's also still more than most people would want to pay for just reboot-less kernel updates. Sure, there's also actual support included in the contract, but the lack of an ala carte option for just Ksplice Uptrack doesn't make a premier support contract any easier to swallow.

I should note here, that regular package updates via yum, and regular kernel updates via yum, are still totally free. If you don't mind rebooting, Ksplice isn't a must-have. If Oracle wanted to attract more customers, an ala carte option for Ksplice Uptrack would be a step in the right direction. If they wanted to really build some good will with the Linux community, they'd make Ksplice Uptrack free for everyone. I know it may sound weird to mention Oracle and good will together, but I'd never thought I'd see Oracle and "free" mentioned together either. As it is, it feels like Uptrack is being used as the bait for a support contract, when the support contract should really be able to stand on its own.

DTrace: Debugging and Troubleshooting in Real Time

To be fair, the DTrace modules can be plugged into a lot of Linux kernels already out there, but Oracle Linux has done the leg work for their users. Maybe you're not doing the sort of development that requires DTrace, but it's still something handy to have in the toolbox when something breaks. It's also a handy way to profile already running processes at any moment, with little to no impact on performance when tracing a process. Oracle maintains a long list of DTrace resources on their OpenSolaris site.

Should I give this a look?

If you're already perfectly happy with your RHEL or CentOS Linux install, Oracle Linux is a hard sell, even at the price of free. After toying about with the system, I'd say it's at least worth a hard look. As it is, you get the benefits of CentOS or Scientific Linux, with Oracle's own stuff bolted on, and their enhancements, even minus Ksplice, make a compelling argument to use Oracle Linux. If you are setting up a machine to use Oracle's database software, Oracle Linux is the best choice, since it's been designed to support Oracle DB, and is the same Linux that Oracle uses in-house. While Oracle's premier support contract is cheaper than the RHEL alternative, the actual cost of switching from RHEL to Oracle in a given case may not be. While this release is a good first step for Oracle, more options, like free Ksplice Uptrack, or even a Ksplice Uptrack subscription, would make it an easier sell.

If you'd like to give Oracle Linux a try, without having to jump through a lot of hoops, the Oracle Linux Wiki has a list of download sites.

cancel ×

170 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Unsinkable Ship (5, Funny)

kdougherty (772195) | more than 2 years ago | (#40793781)

Just don't navigate this kernel into any icebergs.

Re:Unsinkable Ship (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40793961)

Just don't navigate this kernel into any icebergs.

I'm waiting for the Linux Malware called "Iceburg" - or malware that targets Oracle Linux specifically.

Re:Unsinkable Ship (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794297)

Personally I am more scared of that brown stuff floating everywhere.

All I can tell you is, I am pretty damn sure that isn't mud.

Oracle not worth it (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40793845)

Yeah, after Oracle tries to sue the planet for their most precious IP, I really want to use their products. No thanks. The fight with The Google showed their true colors. http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=2012053015590290

As an product engineer for my company, I need to look out for sue-happy companies. This is one of them. Buh-bye.

Re:Oracle not worth it (3, Informative)

Teresita (982888) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794035)

Oracle tweaked a 2.6 kernel? Whoop de doo, Linux Mint 13 ships with 3.2, which is at least starting from a 2.6.39 baseline. For all we know, Oracle is tweaking a 2004 kernel from the SuSE 9.1 days. And we don't know, because it was closed source until this announcement.

Re:Oracle not worth it (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794141)

For all we know, Oracle is tweaking a 2004 kernel from the SuSE 9.1 days. And we don't know, because it was closed source until this announcement.

How can Oracle keep a Linux kernel closed source while distributing it?

Re:Oracle not worth it (1)

Teresita (982888) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794247)

You got me, AC, I posted without thinking.

Re:Oracle not worth it (0, Flamebait)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794165)

Well, I'm expecting that we'll see lots of comments like this. People trashing Oracle because it's not free, Oracle are made up of vampire squids, nosql is a better solution.....

Once you grow up and get into the real world, you'll see that ALL large fortune 1000 type companies will use Oracle, or one of the major (expensive) non-free alternatives. There are lots of reasons why, but generally, they get the job done. Whining and complaining about Oracle's software just makes you look like a child.

Now, why use Oracle's Linux? Let me give you a hint, it wasn't made for Richard Stallman. The main target are companies that are already running Oracle's software.

Oracle have a yum server, they supply pre-configured kernels, they have all of the required packages in one place that you need to get the software going. The technical notes on their support site have lots of examples with Linux. If you use either Redhat, or Oracle's Linux, then it's easier to get the software working.

If you're not already an Oracle customer, then it you want to use Oracle's Linux, then that's fine, and they're happy for you to use it..... BUT, you're NOT their main target audience.

What Oracle want you to do these days is buy their Exadata servers, with everything, hardware, software, storage, etc, all supplied by Oracle. If they could lock you in to being only Oracle, then they would love it. And have you ever looked at the price? To get a fully loaded Exadata, with Oracle software costs the same as a house.

So, if you're a screaming freetard, go on and keep flaming away at Oracle, they don't care, you don't have the money.

I've used Oracle professionally for over 20 years, so, it's expensive...... you know, I don't care, I've never paid the bills.

You want to know something? Because it's so expensive, then the companies that can afford it can also afford to pay high amounts for the people who look after it, and that's where I come in.

So, please, whinge, cry, rant and complain. Please do not use the software. Fortune 1000 companies will continue to use it, no matter what you say. Please do not learn how to use the software, and convince your friends not to either. I really appreciate that you're helping to restrict supply of skilled Oracle people, it helps keep up my daily rate.

 

Re:Oracle not worth it (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794275)

Cool story bro.

Re:Oracle not worth it (5, Informative)

DuckDodgers (541817) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794301)

I can only speak for myself, but I work at a small company that has to be pretty careful with the IT budget. We've had plenty of experiences with a useful piece of commercial software that was critical or nearly critical to our operations suddenly doubling in price. We've also had experiences where we brought a bug to the attention of the vendor and were asked to pay a premium support fee for them to fix it.

The worst was Crystal Reports. We used one of their products that cost $650 per license in 2004 and was over $15,000 for an equivalent license in 2009.

I have friends and relatives that work with Oracle and they're generally very pleased with their products. I respect that. But I'm not going to advocate using Oracle unless my employer has enough cash that they can swallow doubling of their proprietary software licensing costs without taking more than a few percent off their annual profits. Fortune 1000 companies are in that position, but the bulk of the economy is not.

Re:Oracle not worth it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794503)

Based on your description, Oracle probably wouldn't return your calls anyway.

I find it interesting that Slashdot can't stand Oracle's business practices, but loves to give IBM a loving ball massage everytime they come up. At least Oracle isn't actively trying to outsource your DBA job to India.

Re:Oracle not worth it (5, Informative)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794693)

Are you kidding? Oracle loves to spout rhetoric about how they have made their product so automated that you don't need a DBA anymore. Oracle also sells outsourcing services.

So you are wrong. Oracle is actively trying to outsource your DBA job to India.

Clearly you don't know Oracle.

Re:Oracle not worth it (-1, Flamebait)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794967)

Yes, Oracle are trying to send everything to India.

And, maybe that they would like to give the impression that you don't need a DBA, but that's not the reality.

So, what does this have to do with using Oracle Linux?

Nothing..... you just want to flame since you probably make you think it makes you look cool. It doesn't.

Re:Oracle not worth it (2)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795143)

> So, what does this have to do with using Oracle Linux?

Ask the guy who actually brought it up.

>
> Nothing..... you just want to flame since you probably make you think it makes you look cool. It doesn't.

I just set the record straight. Stop swimming in the kool-aid.

Re:Oracle not worth it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795207)

You're a fucking retard. What, precisely, do you think Oracle intends for you to run on Oracle Linux -- the only RHEL 6 derivative currently certified by Oracle to run Oracle's database?

Re:Oracle not worth it (1)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794651)

Oracle is expensive. For most medium sized or less companies, I really couldn't recommend it - it's just too expensive for what it does, and there are a lot of other solutions which are more cost effective.

Once you scale up to large companies, with it departments with hundreds of people, and user bases of thousands to tens of thousands, then the cost per user makes it more reasonable. If you need enterprise scale products, then Oracle software is a good solution.

Re:Oracle not worth it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794973)

My experience with Oracle products that Oracle itself has developed (i.e. not products of companies they bought, made before acquisition) is that one, and only one, is of any value. And that would be their flagship database.
Any other "enterprise" software they have written, and that I have used, has been mediocre at best, but crappy too often.

So brand "Oracle" for me means that its strongest asset is brand, that Oracle logo, that some are happy to pay premium for.
In fact, I am surprised that they keep on minting money, i.e. being wildly profitable. This can not be explained by the products they build; products that make Microsoft look like a quality-driven company.

Re:Oracle not worth it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794371)

Why don't you go find an online game and use up some of that venom on a bunch of twelve year olds.

Oracle might be technically competent, but they're complete assholes when it comes to bussiness. Unless you're a reviewer for slashdot or hobbyist, it's the last part that you'll find to be more important.

Re:Oracle not worth it (-1, Troll)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794873)

So, as predicted, my comment gets moderated downwards (at least at the time I'm posting this), and all of the comments trashing Oracle have been moderated up.

Ok, let's get this straight, Oracle is an evil company that is a blight on the face of the earth and will do your best to suck your company dry..... .... but what does this have to do with Oracle's version of linux?

Geez, at least try to make a technical comment about why Oracle's Linux is a poor choice. Ad hominen attacks may make you feel good, but it doesn't add anything to the discussion on the merits of Oracle Linux.

Oracle Linux main target audience is for people that are already using Oracle.

If you're not using Oracle products, and you haven't tried out Oracle Linux, then if you want to make a childish attack on Oracle, there are lots of other places to do it.

If you want to mod me down because you don't agree with me, then why don't you take a chill pill, crack open a cold one, and what the Olympics opening ceremony instead, and let the people who have experience engage in discussion.

Re:Oracle not worth it (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795335)

OLE is being pushed as a competitor with RHEL. Despite being virtually identical in every meaningful way, Oracle makes wild claims of superiority, then certifies its products on only its own derivative OS. These are dirty, underhanded tricks, and anyone who doesn't understand that they will fleece their customers once they obtain lock-in via proprietary modifications is too naive to be making purchasing decisions and/or lacks sufficient experience with Oracle products.

Satisfied? How much are they paying you to white-knight their product?

Re:Oracle not worth it (1, Interesting)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795485)

Yes, so Oracle are trying their best to get a complete lock in.

Why does that matter to you?

Are you an Oracle customer? Well, the OS is free and open source, so you can use if if you want, or fork it.

You're not an Oracle customer? Then what really is the point of attacking? How different is Oracle from MS or Microsoft? You don't think they didn't try their best for 100% lock-in?

Re:Oracle not worth it (3, Interesting)

bobaferret (513897) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795937)

There is no technical reason why you shouldn't use OLE over SL/CENT/RHEL. This is all about their sun acquisition. let me have time for my tea leaves to settle to the bottom of my glass here.... Here's what I see. Oracle buys aligning sun micro systems who got their hat handed to them by Linux, but not just by Linux, but by Redhat . Redhat is the largest kernel contributor by far. This implies that the pay the most kernel developers. Redhat is funded by enterprise customers by and large. Not small shops who only need CentOS, but by the Shops that are more than willing to use Orcale DBs. Lets just consider for a moment that Oracle managed to switch everyone using oracle from RHEL to OEL. What kind of impact would that have on RHEL? Enough to put a dent into it? Enough to put RHEL out of business? Or enough to keep them from really throwing their support at the kernel? I don't know. But in the long run I think Oracle see Linux as the enemy, and their going to try and take it down by going after Redhat. I think Oracle is a much bigger threat to Linux than MS ever was, because Oracle is going to target Linux in the enterprise space, not the desktop. Do I think it will actually work? No. But do I think this is their plan? yes. I think Redhat could stop this amazingly quickly, by simply offering RHEL for free w/o a support contract. But they stopped that for a reason I can't remember long ago. Hell Redhat could just write their own damn script to port Cent over to RHEL. Perhaps push a fresher kernel choice out more often as well. So to recap, don't use OLE, because they don't actually LIKE Liniux, and will do everything they can to hurt it.

Re:Oracle not worth it (5, Funny)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795055)

Considering you have a pretty low slashdot id (means you have probably seen a thing or two) AND created a well-constructed, well-thought-out argument, you are no longer the slashdot target market.

Re:Oracle not worth it (0, Offtopic)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795223)

You know, I think that your comment is the most insightful one I've read in a long time.

I read previously how /. has changed over time, and I still had faith that there could be rational discussions, but it looks like I was wrong, and all of the other people who said ./ has gone down hill were right.

I started reading ./ in late 1997, and it looks like that early culture is really dead and gone forever.

Now days, group think has really taken over.

Just because I state a non-popular opinion, instead of debate, I get modded to hell. It looks like all of the cool kids are attacking Oracle these days, so anything other than full retard anit-Oracle is acceptable.

Re:Oracle not worth it (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795473)

Yes, I can see that your experience with "./" is extensive. It's almost as impressive as your familiarity with logical fallacies.

Despite your appeal to authority, you are not the only one with applicable experience: I have been a Unix admin in the Fortune 500 world for nearly 20 years, currently assigned as Senior SA to one of the largest Oracle databases in the world, and am currently supporting an initiative to convert our entire production environment from HPUX to RHEL. The customer in question is insisting on RHEL 5 specifically because Oracle has withheld certification from RHEL 6, which, again, is virtually identical to the Oracle product in every meaningful way. I happen to know what the fuck I'm talking about.

I have no great beef with Oracle. They are simply in the process /right now/ of making my life a living hell over /this very issue/. You want to paint everyone who is trash-talking Oracle as some kind of hater, fine... but if that's the case, then you're an unabashed fanboi, and you /deserve/ to be downvoted.

Re:Oracle not worth it (0)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795537)

Oracle has withheld certification from RHEL 6

Right, this is directly from Oracle's support website, on the certification of Oracle 11.2 :

Certification Information for Oracle Database on Linux x86-64 [ID 1304727.1]

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 - Database 11.2.0.3 and higher

        Red Hat kernel 2.6.32-71.el6.x86_64 or later
        Oracle Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel (UEK R1) 2.6.32-100.28.5.el6.x86_64 or later

There's the document id. If you have access to Oracle support, you can look it up.

Ok, so why are you making things up???? Just to be cool to attach Oracle? Fun making baseless statements?

Re:Oracle not worth it (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795661)

My info is out of date. As of April, when the documents for this project were signed, over my objections, that certification was approved for OLE only. I apologize for making a false statement on the point of current certification. The rest of my objections stand: that was a dirty and underhanded tactic to secure support contracts and further the process of lock-in that I'm already having to deal with on a daily basis, and there is not a meaningful enough difference between the products for there to have ever been any kind of lag.

I suspect we'll be restarting the entire planning process soon, which only shifts my rage from one target to another. Yay.

Re:Oracle not worth it (-1, Flamebait)

Mr Thinly Sliced (73041) | more than 2 years ago | (#40796021)

Unfortunately that's just how things go.

I've watched the slashdot audience change from dirty geeks looking for musical visualisation of sorting algorithms into "social media" pro piracy anarchists (yes, I know you call yourselves libertarian).

It used be that intelligent discussion was rewarded. Hell, even the trolls were better.

There's still the occasional nugget of old slashdot, but as another poster pointed out, we're not the demographic anymore.

D

TLDR: I miss my pages being WIDE

Re:Oracle not worth it (1)

FreakyGeeky (23009) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795505)

The slashdot demographic has certainly shifted over the years.

Re:Oracle not worth it (1)

sharkey (16670) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795801)

50,628 is a pretty low /. ID?

Re:Oracle not worth it (5, Funny)

Wolfrider (856) | more than 2 years ago | (#40796145)

--Eh? What u say?

winning post (1)

Aero77 (1242364) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795215)

Since we can't mod anything higher than 5, I'm just going to say this: Most discussions about a story only have 1 truly useful response that indicate the person gets it and can explain it to someone else. Your post is the winner for this thread. Congrats!

Re:Oracle not worth it (1)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795833)

> Oracle are made up of vampire squids

That seems reason enough....

Re:Oracle not worth it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795873)

How's it possible for you to breathe up on that high horse of yours?

Re:Oracle not worth it (2)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794645)

Who needs to run a non-free version of Linux?

People who buy expensive commercial software, that's who.

If you are already running the megabuck database, a few more bucks for RHEL or SLES is really not a big deal.

If you aren't already giving Oracle a big pile of money EVERY YEAR, then their version of Linux is pretty irrelevant.

"It's significantly cheaper than RHEL support" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40793861)

What does that mean. Both vendors likely provide many packages with various options and configurations and discounts. How about a "for example".

Re:"It's significantly cheaper than RHEL support" (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40793927)

As with many salesperson-driven firms, the price varies A LOT from customer to customer.

Re:"It's significantly cheaper than RHEL support" (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794051)

You quoted it wrong.

While Oracle is quick to note that it costs less than a similar-tier RHEL support contract

Oracle? (2)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 2 years ago | (#40793871)

Can you spell L-O-C-K-I-N?

Re:Oracle? (2)

swan5566 (1771176) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794029)

It's released under GPL. There's no "promise" that this will stay open, but then suddenly not be. *cough*java*cough*

Your sig (1)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794701)

No, there is a third group. The people genuinely trying to understand. Understanding is not the same as looking for answers.

Re:Your sig (1)

swan5566 (1771176) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795715)

In the specific context of a debate, I would have to disagree. Though, to be sure, there is the time and place for fact-finding, but that's not what I'm referring to.

Re:Oracle? (2)

PRMan (959735) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794891)

O-R-A-C-L-E?

Oracle? No thanks. (5, Interesting)

miltonw (892065) | more than 2 years ago | (#40793875)

This is the Oracle that tried to kill Android? Then I'm not interested. Thanks.

Re:Oracle? No thanks. (5, Insightful)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794109)

This is the Oracle that writes poorly implemented and poorly documented installers for their weirdly designed (and poorly documented) database software? Still not interested.

Re:Oracle? No thanks. (1)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795229)

This is the Oracle that writes poorly implemented and poorly documented installers for their weirdly designed (and poorly documented) database software? Still not interested.

But. But. But... It's unBREAKable!

I'm Interested! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794195)

I'm interested! Wait a second ... *shuffles around in his desk drawer and pulls up an empty bottle of KY Jelly* ... awww, never mind :(

Suddenly, a wild Oracle appears [i.qkme.me] !

Re:Oracle? No thanks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794211)

This is the Oracle that tried to kill Android?

No, they didn't try to kill Android, they just bought Sun for 6 billion dollar and tried to extort the same amount of Google for six lines of code... They wound never, ever try the same crap with Unbreakable Larryx....

Re:Oracle? No thanks. (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794821)

When did Oracle try to kill Android Linux?

Faster updates (1)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 2 years ago | (#40793909)

My company tries to enforce the use of Oracle Linux in our datacenter so I mostly wind up with it by default. I generally let the build guys do that and then I run a script to convert it to CentOS when I actually need to use it in production. That way, it mirrors what most of our developers have on their desk. The only real benefit I see for OEL is the faster turnaround for RH updates. In real-world usage, they've been pretty much the same for our typical use cases (busy LAMP boxes). If I were to avoid OEL, it would be only because I don't like encouraging a bully.

Best,

Re:Faster updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794023)

wait,wut? what shitty company is this that doesn't audit their server?

Re:Faster updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794103)

You truly sound like a terrible administrator. Your company has a policy that you subvert because you, personally, do not like "encouraging a bully"?

That is not your decision to make. You do not own the servers. You admit they have a faster turnaround for updates and otherwise are "pretty much the same", and yet you feel the need to stick it to the man.

For shame.

Re:Faster updates (2)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794179)

Who said anything about being an administrator? These are development machines for developers. Once things disappear off into production land, I let those people sort out what they want to run out in public and I know that our code will continue to work.

Best,

Re:Faster updates (1)

ilsaloving (1534307) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794261)

Rather than having to actively fight such a thing, which you will undoubtedly burn out from in time, why not get them to stop pushing it? There was an article on slashdot a couple weeks ago about how lousy a prospect OEL is. Maybe find that and give it to the PHBs?

Re:Faster updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795667)

Boo hoo.

Really? (5, Insightful)

raydobbs (99133) | more than 2 years ago | (#40793917)

Oh yeah, I want to run right out there and do business with a company that seems to be in the business of suing people over every little thing - like saying their database server products suck... or that you found a way to make money with one of their products they didn't think of... or that you use one of their products in a way they didn't think of themselves and charge you outrageous fees for...

If I had wanted that, I would have bought copious amounts of SCO products to keep Daryl McBride employed. Let me put it more simply to you, for those at Oracle who might care:

I'd rather eat razor sharp ground glass than use your products.

Re:Really? (-1, Troll)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794259)

Oh my. Oracle are just as evil as all of the other major multinational companies. Name me a company the size of Oracle, in any industry, who is not evil.

You don't want to use their products? Fine. If you don't have hundreds of thousands to spend, then they're not really interested in what you think.

You may be big in your pond, and have a low slashdot id, but if you're not an Oracle customer already, they really don't care about it.

Why don't you rant against M$ (and please use the dollar sign when you do it)? They're a big evil software company too.

Re:Really? (5, Insightful)

raydobbs (99133) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794443)

Perhaps they are - and your right - I don't spend millions on software, so I would not be a threat to Oracle in their 'pond' to use your term. The point I was trying to make is that I am not about to set out and use their product FOR FREE that would put me into bed with them. Their products are a mess, their customer service is awful (I've worked for a few Oracle customers - they ALWAYS wished they had never entered into the agreement to use their gear - ALWAYS), and their corporate culture is nasty.

Sure, I could rant about Microsoft too - but they aren't the authors of this software, or even a subject of this article - so why should I?

Re:Really? (1)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794739)

Oracle aren't small time dealers, you really have nothing to worry about by using their version of Linux. They aren't going to get you hooked for free, then squeeze you dry. What Oracle do is charge you a lot for the first hit, then try to squeeze you dry.

If you're not already using Oracle's products, then they don't really care about you, you're not the target audience.

My question would be, why on earth would anyone who already isn't using Oracle would want to use their Linux - I can't think of a single reason why.

Re:Really? (1)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795049)

Gee, the anti-Oracle tools are out in force today. Modded down to 0 for being a troll? Don't worry, I hit the karma cap back when karma was still being shown. You'll get hit back in metamoderation.

So, what don't you agree with?

The fact that unless you're a huge company already using Oracle's products, that you're not the target audience for Oracle Linux?

Fine, instead of modding me down non-stop, have the balls to actually make a comment and engage in useful discussion.

Re:Really? (1)

mungtor (306258) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794401)

Oh yeah, I want to run right out there and do business with a company that seems to be in the business of suing people over every little thing

If I had wanted that, I would have bought copious amounts of SCO products to keep Daryl McBride employed. Let me put it more simply to you, for those at .... who might care:

I'd rather eat razor sharp ground glass than use your products.

-- Posted with love from my iPad

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794575)

So then..I take it you don't have any Apple products lying about, right ?

Missing question...... (3, Insightful)

mormop (415983) | more than 2 years ago | (#40793921)

The only question I really wanted to hear answered is "Do you guarantee that once I've converted all of my servers to your free product, it will still be available further down the line? Or, to put it another way, am I likely to end up having to pay for the binary rpms or do a full re-install of CentOS later because you've changed the licencing and started issuing source rpms only"?

Re:Missing question...... (4, Insightful)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794197)

Yes, they do guarantee. It's no secret, the product lifecycle is on their support website.

Also, what Oracle have put together is all open sourced, so you're free to fork it if you want.

Re:Missing question...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795809)

The only question I really wanted to hear answered is "Do you guarantee that once I've converted all of my servers to your free product, it will still be available further down the line? Or, to put it another way, am I likely to end up having to pay for the binary rpms or do a full re-install of CentOS later because you've changed the licencing and started issuing source rpms only"?

You don't think it's the least bit silly to expect any kind of guarantees on a free product?

Fuck Oracle (4, Insightful)

jon3k (691256) | more than 2 years ago | (#40793951)

I will do anything possible to not use their products and stop anyone I know from using them. Fuck Oracle.

CowboyNeal (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40793995)

Is disgusting and fat

Kernel enhancement translation: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794041)

These include networking optimizations, NUMA optimizations, and enhancements for OCFS2, asynchronous I/O, SSD disk access

NUMA is non-uniform memory access. Basically some supercomputers have memory dedicated to a processor that's much faster than regular memory (I believe this is NOT the same thing as a cache, and is directly accessible).

OCFS2 Oracle Clustered Filesystem. So a filesystem from Oracle.

Asynchronous IO, SSD disk Access, networking optimizations: Kind of vague, so I don't know what the improvement is about here.

  OLTP: Online transaction processing. Also kind of a broad category.

It would have been helpful in the review to have gone over these kernel enhancements in more detail rather than just presenting a list of obscure nouns.

Re:Kernel enhancement translation: (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794291)

NUMA is for any multi-processor system. Even dual-Xeon boards can benefit from NUMA, because each processor has its own memory banks and controller, though the fast QPI links do help in that situation. It becomes progressively more important with larger systems where inter-CPU bandwidth becomes strained. Any improvement here is most welcome.

It really sounds like they applied a few in-house patches to streamline performance. I would rather see these sent back upstream, but again, this is Oracle we're talking about. They might have their rea$on$ for withholding stuff.

Re:Kernel enhancement translation: (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794537)

You don't need to have a super computer to be using NUMA, current generation servers with multiple CPUs with integrated memory controllers use NUMA.

Re:Kernel enhancement translation: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795079)

I would like to know what the listed "SSD disk access" improvements are.

Oracle sucks (3, Interesting)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794229)

They make everything more difficult than it should be. They've given me headaches every time I've had to deal with them over the last 20 years. Pre-sales support, installation, bug research/reporting/resolution are all a royal pain. If you're in the process of buying Oracle software and they try to push *their* Linux on you, push back. Ask them why they are unable/unwilling to support industry standard distributions.

Re:Oracle sucks (4, Interesting)

scubamage (727538) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794857)

I will agree with that. I loved being able to get Sun support on the line when we had issues with our T5220's, and even our old SunFires. They worked quick, knew their stuff, and were, in general, awesome to work with. The last time we had an outage though, the problem was simple enough - the box had lost power, and when it was plugged back in openboot was set to autoboot? = false. So, it just sat there. Our operations team contacted oracle for support since most of them aren't very familiar with Sun. They were even more confused when they hopped on using a term server and saw iLOM's "Linux Kernel" prompts going by. The oracle support representative had no idea what they were talking about. By the time they got me on the horn, they had already been working with Oracle for about 3 hours. I had it fixed in 5 minutes (4 of which were trying to hunt down someone who had an RSA Keyfob I could use to log in to the term server). Considering the support money we give oracle, that was completely unacceptable. Sadly, I'm not the only one whose had this experience here - everything seems to have gone down hill since Oracle bought Sun.

Re:Oracle sucks (4, Interesting)

SgtChaireBourne (457691) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794953)

Speaking of making things more difficult than they should be, the ISO images for installation are not readily available for download. There is a heinous registration [oracle.com] form but no promise of the ISOs even if you fill in the form (with either fake data or real). If Oracle is going to be serious about establishing a distro, it has got to be available at all the usual download sites along site CentOS, Debian and the other established distros.

Re:Oracle sucks (1)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795405)

Ask them why they are unable/unwilling to support industry standard distributions.

Oracle support Redhat, Asianux, SLES10, SLES11 for the latest version of their database.

Also, if you're running the correct kernel version and other associated libraries, then they will also support you.

Pick your distribution, just make sure you're running the required versions of the various packages, and you're fine.

If, on the other hand, you want to pay for Linux support, then yes, Oracle want you to run thier Linux (or Redhat). You can't say this isn't reasonable. Do you expect Redhat to support SLES, or Microsoft to support Android?

Of course, I can't really see the point on paying extra to Oracle for Linux support.

What about the "killer app" (4, Interesting)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794239)

For those who are still waiting for the latest Oracle DB to be certified with RHEL 6, this appears to be one more reason to switch. Giving away an OracleDB certified OS seems like a pretty good ploy on their part. Then choke out Red Hat.

Not going to get any karma points for this move, but I see what they've done here.

Re:What about the "killer app" (2)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794473)

yeah, it makes a lot of sense. There's nothing wrong with another supported Linux distro in the datacentre, and all those companies that require supported stuff can have Linux running their favourite DB (Oracle DB is good to be fair) and not install it on Windows like has been happening a lot. If they say "Linux is the preferred (or best) option" then Microsoft-only customers will start to get over their obsession and look at this alternative, and hopefully be pleasantly surprised.

As for paid-for ksplice updates, this is what companies do. Its fair enough. If you want free, then live with a quick reboot when you update the kernel - its not that big a deal. I'd like to see dtrace better installed for non-Oracle boxes though, but that's the way it goes.

I don't think of this as competing with RedHat, this is competing with Microsoft, trying to get Oracle delivered with their own OS makes things cheaper for Oracle's support teams, and makes Oracle a little bit more cost effective (which they need when Microsoft practically gives their DB away if you buy their OS)

Re:What about the "killer app" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794551)

Oracle is now certified with RHEL 6. (http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/1563775).

Not sure about all the Oracle haters, but our issues have less to do with lockin and open source and more to do with system integration. Our other enterprise tools aren't certified with OEL, we end up supporting another HW stack (ie where do you think the IBM/HP certification for x86 is at...), on and on.

Re:What about the "killer app" (0)

bungo (50628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795683)

As I mentioned in a previous post (which has probably been downmodded to hell, like most of my other posts), Oracle has already certified RHEL 6 with Oracle 11.2

Here's the info from Oracle support website:

Certification Information for Oracle Database on Linux x86-64 [ID 1304727.1]

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 - Database 11.2.0.3 and higher

        Red Hat kernel 2.6.32-71.el6.x86_64 or later
        Oracle Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel (UEK R1) 2.6.32-100.28.5.el6.x86_64 or later

hmmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794251)

I'd rather stick pins in my eyes

What makes Oracle Linux unique... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794267)

What makes Oracle Linux unique, and why would anyone want to use it?

It comes with the Ask.com toolbar for your browser! AMIRITE?!?

Solaris (4, Insightful)

feezly (2695307) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794447)

After what they did with Solaris I would not trust them keep yum updates available with a support contract.

optimized? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794487)

Optimized for what? I just finished dealing with an Enterprise customer that had two parallel pilots testing Oracle DB performance - one on RHEL and one on the equivalent Oracle distribution. The fun part was that it was managed by a guy who used to work for Oracle, so we were pretty sure where this was going. However, after months of testing, they were unable to explain why the same multitude of DB tests on the two platforms showed significant performance differences, and it was Oracle that came up short. They worked very closely with Oracle trying to figure out the problem and were never able to get OEL to even approach the performance they say from the equivalent RHEL out-of-the-box installation.

Fuck em (5, Insightful)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794523)

While support for Ksplice is present in the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel, it does nothing without the Ksplice Uptrack service enabled.

Any software company that locks on-disk, local software to an ongoing support contract can go fuck themselves. Ksplice should be part of the kernel proper; Oracle are holding back progress, plain and simple.

Re:Fuck em (2)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794595)

your comment: plus over nine thousand.

Fuckers. Oracle: ruining everything they touch, in one way or another.

ksplice *is* part of the kernel proper (2)

Chirs (87576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40796187)

I have used ksplice, back when it was an experimental project before Oracle bought it.

The core ksplice code is part of the kernel. The issue is that in order to actually create the updates, you need to build fixes against the running code (like building a kernel module), then you need to have a developer go over the fixes and make sure that the automated tools didn't miss anything (and if they did then fix things up). Also, there are some cases that the automated tools can't handle in which case the developer has to write the fix from scratch.

Nothing is stopping you from creating your own fixes, but if you want their stream of known-good fixes then you'll need to subscribe to the support contract.

RHEL Admin (2)

scubamage (727538) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794553)

Hey all, RHEL admin here. Honestly the only part of this that would be really beneficial for my company would be ksplice. I just can't figure out why the upstream service is required. You need to phone home to upgrade your kernel? Can someone explain this to me?

need to phone home to get the "patches" (2)

Chirs (87576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40796197)

The core ksplice code is part of the kernel. The issue is that in order to actually create the updates, you need to build fixes against the running code (like building a kernel module), then you need to have a developer go over the fixes and make sure that the automated tools didn't miss anything (and if they did then fix things up). Also, there are some cases that the automated tools can't handle in which case the developer has to write the fix from scratch.

Nothing is stopping you from creating your own fixes, but if you want their stream of known-good fixes then you'll need to subscribe to the support contract.

you 7ail it... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794621)

Filed 3ountersuit, Usenet posts. head spinning

No Nouveau (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794627)

The only thing good I have to say about Oracle Linux is that they removed that GODDAMNED Nouveau driver, so their installer actually works on a machine with nVidia graphics.

Deprecated Libs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794669)

Last time I looked (okay it was over a month ago) Oracle's flagship database product (11g) still needed the installation of DEPRECATED libraries! There are good reasons why they were deprecated including a little thing know as security vulnerabilities.... So now they are shipping their own re-rolled Red Hat Enterprise Linux - yes it's RHEL with what ever kruff they need to add to give them a complete stack ... hey so now I don't have to hunt down crap on their support site, it's already there guess in a way that's a good thing?

As someone who's forced to use OEL... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794783)

Quite honestly, I see rather few compelling reasons to run Oracle Enterprise Linux. Really, the only reason I can see for it is if you're going to be running Oracle applications (database, Fusion, etc.,) under the "one throat to choke" point of view. I've had some unpleasant discoveries with OEL, not the least of which is that some of the low level filesets are rather significantly out of date.

Here, if it's an Oracle app, it'll probably get hosted on OEL. If it's not from Oracle, we'll probably host it on RHEL.

Finally, A Free version of Linux (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794799)

I've been wanting to try linux but up until now it was too expensive.

How much did they pay you? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40794847)

Every independent review has given OEL similar or marginally lower ratings than vanilla RHEL. Rightly so, since the only difference is a handful of proprietary, bolt-on modifications that even heavy Oracle DB users will probably never use.

Oracle produced this OS, which is virtually identical to RHEL in every meaningful way, certified their DB on this OS, then withheld that certification from the RHEL release from which OEL originates. It's a dirty and underhanded tactic to muscle into the OS market, and they will screw customers hard on the next absurdly-expensive release and/or support costs, once customers have succumbed to lock-in.

I hope they cut you a big check for this.

No Way (5, Informative)

assertation (1255714) | more than 2 years ago | (#40794883)

I'm a Java Developer. I've had the displeasure of being forced into contact with Oracle after they borged Java and several other technologies I use.

Their documentation is almost deliberately terrible - perhaps to sell support and classes. They are very difficult to communicate with.

They have very little regard for users and developers.

Their help forums fun on bad technology that is very old that even someone putting up a personal web site would be ashamed to use.

Lame (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795253)

"After toying about with the system, I'd say it's at least worth a hard look"

That's all you can come up with? Crap some words on a page, call it a review. There was no content here.

what the FUCK? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795379)

What have you become, Slashdot?

Nothing against Oracle... (4, Insightful)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#40795877)

Got nothing in particular against Oracle. We use their database products. But RHEL and Suse both being established, robust distributions that are more than good enough, there's really no compelling reason to switch. Combine that with an inherent (but not absolutely deal-killing) distrust of Oracle's business practices, and we'll just stay where we are, thanks.

Problem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40795901)

I wonder if they understand the game they're playing.

If Oracle beats and subsequently crushes Red Hat, it will no longer have any "innovations" to "build" on.

Cough.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>