Next fast-track mission
Emergency cargo flight with replacement underwear and cleaning supplies.
115 posts • joined 15 Jun 2009
Thank you! I've been trying to remember the "girl the plastic cover is named after" name on and off for years, and for whatever reason both my Google Fu and my friends' memories have failed me. I must travel in the wrong circles, or live in the wrong country.
Reminds me a lot of this
I guess it does if you squint just right: misuse of a thing in the service of a goal. Only in one case the goal was an odd stab at getting the United States to promote peace, the other's goal was stabbing the United States to promote Julian Assange.
original MongoDB post lists multiple Solaris distros, none of which run on SPARC
Argle bargle, Solaris is SPARC only, no one uses it on x86!
Nobody in their right mind actually runs Solaris for anything vaguely important on anything other than SPARC!
I can tell you with great assurance that many companies on Wall Street, in retail, and in government, just to name a few markets, ran Solaris on their x86 systems for their very important applications. One of the US' largest supermarket chains ran their entire business on Solaris x86 at one point.
...whether many companies still do is a more interesting question, since Oracle has worked for the last 7 years to make it difficult and expensive to get Solaris for non-Oracle boxes.
you should not fire someone because you dont like his political ideas.
But perhaps you should fire someone if they are a liability to your company. Or, more assertively: if someone is a liability to your company, you should fire them.
Mr. Damore has conclusively proven that he cannot work well with others. I would not assign him to any team of any composition, based on his documented thought processes and aggressive contempt for empathy,
In addition, he has put the company in a bind, internally and externally.
Therefore, I would give him the chance to exercise his right to be happy elsewhere, and at the same time make room for a more productive and less disruptive employee.
There actually wasn't that much equipment, and very little of it had the ability to communicate with anything when the plane was over the ocean. The only device equipped to communicate via satellite was the engine diagnostic reporting equipment, which is what gave the two most likely paths that the plane traveled -- narrowed down to one when debris started to appear.
The pings from the engine recorder delivered no direct information about the location or status of the plane (other than engine performance stats), and only transmitted once an hour. That's an incredibly sparse amount of data to work with.
The fact of the matter is that an aircraft over the ocean, once it gets a certain distance from land, is not readily trackable.
I would say the CVR is going to give very little information, because unless I'm seriously mistaken, it's only going to have the last 30 minutes or so of the flight, and anything of note that happened in the cockpit would have happened hours before then. (Unless someone really was hanging on to give a final soliloquy just before the engines ran out of fuel.)
The flight data recorder might note whether the plane was on autopilot, heading and such, but will mostly confirm what the very existence of the plane will indicate -- this is where it crashed by running out of fuel.
Separate from the data recorders, the most interesting information to glean may be indications of damage to the plane, perhaps caused by a cargo fire, which seems the most likely scenario to me.
“Future features and functionality in Solaris will continue to be delivered through dot releases instead of more disruptive major releases.”
"Solaris 11 follows a Continuous Delivery model…”
“It's likely to be the customers like that who asked for [no Solaris 12]. S11 takeup is steady, but slow, and neither customers nor ISVs will want the disruption of yet another major release yet”
I’ve seen this movie before.
After Solaris 10, word came from the executive suite that Solaris 11 would not be coming out for… a while. Possibly ever. Can’t spend all that money on ISV adoption, customers are ascairt, and so on. Let’s just keep on adding things to Solaris 10.
Customers would hear the “Solaris 10 forevarr” message (aka “continuous non-disruptive delivery”) and say, “that sounds great! So when do we get feature X in Solaris 10?”
“Oh, well…” —kicking of ground with toes ensues— “…that requires feature Y, which would require too much change for a dot-dot release…” (remember, as someone already pointed out, “Solaris 10” is really SunOS 5.10, so “continuous delivery” would come through dot-dot releases.)
Customers in general do not want anything to change, ever… except for, of course, the new things. Can we have all the new things, please? But don’t change anything!
When Oracle took over, they saw what was in Solaris 11 and never coming in Solaris 10, and listened to customers who wanted those things, and said, “ship that sucker.” Which took another almost two years, for a total of almost seven years between 10 and 11 by then.
(Oracle had a novel way of solving the adoption costs, though, by not spending anything on customer or ISV adoption. Which might explain the “takeup is steady, but slow” —after FIVE YEARS— part.)
The good news is that a big reason why “continuous delivery” was a non-starter for Solaris 10 was that all the features needed to make it work at all, most notably IPS, were in Solaris 11. So it will definitely be easier to do this than it was 10 years ago. The questions are how much Oracle is willing to spend on backporting how many features from Solaris 12, and at what point do you start fudging the line between what is and isn’t a dot release?
The rain gage to me, and what I’d be asking as a customer, is, “When do you expect to continuously deliverate zero-downtime patching?” since that is A) on the top of the list of Solaris 12 features they’ve been talking about, and B) something that if it makes it into Solaris 11 would be strong proof that “Continuous Delivery” is doable, even for something requiring what would seem to be major changes to the kernel.
I'm not entirely sure how one would define where an OS ends and applications start
This is actually a pretty important concept. If you don’t have a crystal-clear boundary between the OS and applications, you don’t really have an OS, and application compatibility across releases is a vague fantasy rather than reality. This was the rap against Linux since practically forever: that the OS interface guide was called "the kernel source code."
“and whether a lack of development in the OS is a major deal.”
Spoiler: it is. OSes keep evolving, either with outright new developments (think DTrace in the Solaris world), or co-opting and integrating features that had previously been bolted on outside the OS (virtualized compute, virtualized networking, virtualized storage come to mind). Security continues to be ripe for development.
An example of how lack of development can bite you: When Oracle bought Ksplice in 2011, it was a unique technology, allowing Linux sysadmins to apply kernel fixes without rebooting. Oracle has been talking about how they've been working to get similar functionality into Solaris ever since then, with Solaris 12 as the target release, which would be cool, but at this point it would now be catchup rather than a leadership feature.
So yeah, if this move means functionality like this is seriously delayed or even dropped from Solaris, it will be a major deal. Ditto for their work on integrating Docker. Solaris Containers/Zones is already great, but but adding Docker integration would have been extraordinarily useful.
"Solaris doesn't have systemd. Oracle would have to do quite a lot of porting then to accommodate such a package."
The Solaris equivalent to systemd is SMF, which came in with Solaris 10 in 2005. It was considered to be heretical by Unix traditionalists, but it was a major leap forward in service management and reliability. It’s another great example of “development in the OS being a major deal”.
There’s a lot more to OS development than just keeping existing userland programs running, or even accommodating new hardware. It’s the underlying plumbing, carefully hidden away from the applications (or presented as new services with stable interfaces), where innovation can really pay off. Killing off Solaris 12, which has been in development for over five years, and trying to shoehorn that work back into Solaris 11, is going to make it even harder for Solaris to stay current with OS trends than it had been.
What I’ll be looking for is signs of any of the advanced work that was going into Solaris 12 (and there’s more than what we’ve been talking about here) suddenly making its way exclusively into Oracle Linux.
"What the roadmap does tell us is that the new OS will debut in 2017"
The rather large box fades in and splays itself comfortably over 2017 and most of 2018. Generally in "arm-wavy roadmap" -speak, that means "Sure, 2017... or so."
Given that they're making a seemingly abrupt shift from Solaris 12 being the target development base for new features to Solaris 11, it doesn't seem likely that it's going to be ready any time soon.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021