[HN Gopher] The Future of Big Iron: An Interview with IBM's Chri...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Future of Big Iron: An Interview with IBM's Christian Jacobi
        
       Author : rbanffy
       Score  : 53 points
       Date   : 2024-10-15 09:13 UTC (13 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (morethanmoore.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (morethanmoore.substack.com)
        
       | mindcrime wrote:
       | CEREAL                         Oh yeah, you want a seriously
       | righteous hack,                         you score one of those
       | Gibsons man. You know,                         supercomputers
       | they use to like, do physics,                         and look
       | for oil and stuff?
       | PHREAK                         Ain't no way, man, security's too
       | tight. The                         big iron?
       | DADE                         Maybe. But, if I were gonna hack
       | some heavy                         metal, I'd, uh, work my way
       | back through some                         low security, and try
       | the back door.
        
         | stonethrowaway wrote:
         | Came for the news, stayed for the Hackers.
        
       | froh wrote:
       | Jacobi is one of 70 IBM Fellows (think IBM internal professors,
       | free reign over a research budget, you gain the title with
       | technical prowess plus business acumen)
       | 
       | at the heart of the Mainframe success is this:
       | 
       | > I'd say high-availability and resiliency means many things, but
       | in particular, two things. It means you have to catch any error
       | that happens in the system - either because a transistor breaks
       | down due to wear over the lifetime, or you get particle
       | injections, or whatever can happen. You detect the stuff and then
       | you have mechanisms to recover. You can't just add this on top
       | after the design is done, you have to be really thinking about it
       | from the get-go.
       | 
       | and then he goes into details how that is achieved. the article
       | nicely goes into some details.
       | 
       | oh and combine the 99.9999999% availability "nine nines" with
       | insane throughput. as in real time phone wiretapping throughput,
       | or real time mass financial transactions, of course.
       | 
       | or a web server for an online image service.
       | 
       | or "your personal web server in a mouse click", sharing 10.000
       | such virtual machines on a single physical machine. which has a
       | shared read only /ist partition mounted into all guests. not
       | containers, no, virtual machines, in ca 2006...
       | 
       | "don't trust a computer you can lift"
        
         | wolf550e wrote:
         | The amount of throughput you can get out of AMD EPYC zen5
         | servers for the price of a basic mainframe is insane. Even if
         | IBM wins in single core perf using absurd amount of cache and
         | absurd cooling solution, the total rack throughput is
         | definitely won by "commodity" hardware.
        
           | rbanffy wrote:
           | Maybe, but then you need to engineer the 99.99999% uptime
           | yourself.
           | 
           | If it were actually cheaper, IBM wouldn't be selling these
           | machines so well.
        
             | wolf550e wrote:
             | I don't think they are actually selling those machines so
             | well. They have a captive legacy custom base, who else is
             | buying those?
        
               | neverartful wrote:
               | From TFA: "Overall, Z is growing very healthily. LinuxONE
               | is the fastest area of growth for us right now."
               | 
               | However, he didn't elaborate or give any examples. If I
               | were the interviewer, I would have followed it with:
               | "Oh?! Can you provide some examples for the readers who
               | believe that you only sell to captive audiences?"
        
             | Muromec wrote:
             | They are mostly selling to the captive audience who is 40
             | years deep into COBOL and can't pull out until it falls on
             | top of them.
        
           | neverartful wrote:
           | These comments always come up with every mainframe post. It's
           | not only about performance. If it were it would be x86 or
           | pSystems (AIX/POWER). The reason customers buy mainframes is
           | RAS (reliabililty, availability, scalability). Notice that
           | performance is not part of RAS.
        
       | spiritplumber wrote:
       | Big Iron speedrun any%
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMRCye4JhEo&list=PL5ty576dcO...
       | 
       | (we need a bit of silly in our lives)
        
       | RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
       | Honestly mainframes sound like what on-premise aims for. You get
       | uptime and proactive maintenance and stuff just runs. Yet the
       | machine is on your premise and the data belongs to you.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-10-15 23:00 UTC)