I wrote:
> I beg to differ. Solaris has a huge bloated inefficient pig
> of a kernel as compared to Linux. They do wacky things like
Peter Mutsaers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> replied:
> We just bought some SUN Ultra's with Solaris 2.6. The Ultra's have
> only 64MB of RAM, but still I find them very efficient.
Run Linux on them instead, and you'll find them *more* efficient. I stand
by my statement that Solaris is inefficient compared to Linux.
> Is your opinion based on real experience with recent versions of
> Solaris?
It was based on real experience with Solaris about 18 months ago. Unless
they've improved a huge amount in the intervening time, I wouldn't even
consider using it.
For some applications raw performance is more important that the
price/performance ratio. But for most applications I'd strongly recommend
using inexpensive x86 hardware instead, e.g., dual Pentium II systems.
They perform nearly as well as the midrange DEC, HP, IBM, SGI, and Sun
hardware, but cost nowhere near as much.
Cheers,
Eric
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
