[HN Gopher] Creating a Solaris 10 zone on OpenIndiana
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Creating a Solaris 10 zone on OpenIndiana
        
       Author : zdw
       Score  : 28 points
       Date   : 2021-12-05 15:51 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (rqsall.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (rqsall.com)
        
       | Up_From_Here wrote:
       | I wish I saw more illumos out in the open. The "server UNIX"
       | space needs more competition, more unique approaches and
       | solutions to the problems in our space.
        
       | aphrax wrote:
       | I remember attending the Open Indiana 'launch' after Oracle
       | dumped OpenSolaris. I loved both systems, they were actually nice
       | for desktop use. I think these days the resources/interest just
       | isn't there. Would be great to wrong on this...
        
       | hereforphone wrote:
       | This is a good opportunity to discuss Solaris in general. I've
       | used Solaris for fun in the past. I couldn't get hooked on it. It
       | seemed overly-complex and not very user friendly. I'm a very long
       | time Linux user and I use BSD as well.
       | 
       | What were the primary use cases for Solaris in its prime? Is it
       | still used anywhere now?
        
         | tonoto wrote:
         | I don't know it current position in the market as I haven't
         | worked professionally with Solaris for a couple of years, but
         | the trend is on decline and I have trouble to see its role in
         | new establishments, at least Oracle Solaris. One of the
         | frequent use cases was in the finance sector, I believe due to
         | stability, observability and security model among some of the
         | deciding factors. I still use the open source variant at home
         | (illumos), I find it terrific as a hypervisor.
        
           | throw0101a wrote:
           | Telco as well: Sun sold NEBS-certified servers. Low
           | fire/smoke propagation in components and -48V power supplies
           | variants were available for just about any 'standard' model
           | Sun offered.
           | 
           | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Equipment-
           | Building_Sys...
        
         | Bluecobra wrote:
         | > What were the primary use cases for Solaris in its prime?
         | 
         | I used to administer many Solaris hosts in the past and they
         | were super reliable for hosting enterprise services like mail,
         | NFS, NIS, etc. Kernel panics were pretty rare. One really nice
         | feature is that there's no concept of out of memory killer. I
         | remember one day our LDAP host went haywire and the load
         | average shot up to something like 800. I was able to still get
         | in as root and kill the offending processes.
         | 
         | I have fond memories of Solaris 10, including ZFS, dtrace,
         | zones, SMF. The X4500 "Thumper" storage appliances were pretty
         | bad ass back in the day.
        
           | Wowfunhappy wrote:
           | > One really nice feature is that there's no concept of out
           | of memory killer. I remember one day our LDAP host went
           | haywire and the load average shot up to something like 800. I
           | was able to still get in as root and kill the offending
           | processes.
           | 
           | What does it do when it's out of memory?
        
             | throw0101a wrote:
             | Solaris didn't (still doesn't?) allow processes to allocate
             | memory when none was available. If a program called
             | _malloc()_ and RAM+swap was full, the call returned an
             | error (and ideally the program handled it). IIRC, the BSDs
             | are the same way as well by default.
             | 
             | Linux is the main Unix-y system that allows over-
             | allocation.
        
             | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
             | Funny, I had the opposite question when I started using
             | Linux more often. NetBSD is like Solaris. Running out of
             | memory is not a big deal. I use RAM for the filesystem, so
             | it does happen occassionally. On Linux, the effect of
             | running out of memory was quite a surprise.
        
           | throwawayboise wrote:
           | Also databases. If you were running Oracle in those days, it
           | was almost certainly on Solaris.
        
           | znpy wrote:
           | > One really nice feature is that there's no concept of out
           | of memory killer.
           | 
           | Interesting... So what happened if you ran out of memory ?
        
           | iso1631 wrote:
           | > The X4500 "Thumper" storage appliances were pretty bad ass
           | back in the day.
           | 
           | When you dropped it on your toe
           | 
           | I think the instructions suggested a 4 person (5?) lift into
           | the bay. Even with a hydraulic trolley to get it to the right
           | level we used three people.
        
         | vondur wrote:
         | Didn't the Unix workstations of the 90s have more memory
         | bandwidth compared to PCs and Mac is the time? Also 3d graphics
         | were probably better.
        
           | throwawayboise wrote:
           | Yes, that was the main difference between a "workstation" and
           | a PC.
        
         | coredog64 wrote:
         | What was very helpful about Solaris was that the C library API
         | was stable over the entire run. If you had some grotty old
         | binary that was running on 2.5 or 2.6, you wouldn't have to
         | worry about running it on 8 or 9.
        
         | pjmlp wrote:
         | Besides the sibling replies, Solaris on SPARC ADI is one of the
         | few OSes that has tamed C, given that it makes use of hardware
         | memory tagging for the complete OS.
        
         | iso1210 wrote:
         | SPARC hardawre was very good in the 90s and early 00s, and
         | Solaris was a solid unix, unlike that upstart linux. Solaris
         | came out with ZFS and zones, where were both way ahead of
         | anything in the linux ecosystem, however it's restrictive
         | licensing meant it generally failed to survive the explosion in
         | growth from the cloud boom.
        
           | hereforphone wrote:
           | I had some SPARC hardware when it was already old, that I got
           | off of eBay. Tons of hackers did in the 90s/00s. What was
           | "very good" about the hardware? That it was RISC?
        
             | tw04 wrote:
             | Just now Intel is finally starting to get some of the RAS
             | features sparc + Solaris had back in the 90s. Sun Sparc
             | boxes were far more robust to hardware failure/recovery
             | than their x86 counterparts from what I remember.
             | 
             | https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19620-01/805-4453/6j47hg5qf/ind
             | e...
        
             | iso1210 wrote:
             | 64 bit processor in 1995. AMD64 wasn't released until 2000.
             | From memory Sun/Solaris kit supported far more memory than
             | anything X86 based.
        
               | throw0101a wrote:
               | And multi-CPU/socket. The SPARCcenter 2000/2000E had 20
               | sockets in ~1995:
               | 
               | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun4d#SPARCcenter_2000
        
             | fnord77 wrote:
             | It had ECC memory and networking built in. which at the
             | time I think was hard to find on PC hardware. And the
             | networking just worked. I remember trying to get ethernet
             | to work on a PC with early linux. Nightmare.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-05 23:02 UTC)