QuicksearchDisclaimerThe individual owning this blog works for Oracle in Germany. The opinions expressed here are his own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual author, and neither Oracle nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.
Navigation |
Suitability for useTuesday, April 3. 2007Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
I wonder what makes him consider SuSE (7.1) as the "Linux" part of this comparison? There's more than SuSE out there, and technology in the Linux world also has moved on ever since... I don't see arguments to build that "SuSE-7.1-was-on-top-of-its-class" comment on, in his text.
The other thing: I don't think talking about "subjective components" really gets to the point - we're simply talking about different requirements (both functional and non-functional) here. If people want to have a stable, reliable OS, their choice probably will be different to the one they have to make given they want to have a stable, reliable OS to run MS Exchange (or, talking desktop, any other possibly proprietary and non-Java enterprise application).
You have to read the relating discussion in Murphys blog for understanding the Suse 7.1 comparision.
The author does not allow comments to this entry
|
The LKSF bookThe book with the consolidated Less known Solaris Tutorials is available for download here
Web 2.0Contact
Networking xing.com My photos Comments
about Mon, 01.05.2017 11:21
Thank you for many interesting
blog posts. Good luck with al
l new endeavours!
about Fri, 28.04.2017 13:47
At least with ZFS this isn't c
orrect. A rmdir for example do
esn't trigger a zil_commit, as
long as you don't speci [...]
about Thu, 27.04.2017 22:31
You say:
"The following dat
a modifying procedures are syn
chronous: WRITE (with stable f
lag set to FILE_SYNC), C [...]
|