On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Paul Raulerson <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> Most of your replies in here have little or nothing to do with reality. We
> can take this offline if you wish, but the nonsense you are sprouting is
> rather - surprising.
>
Most of my replies have been backed up by credible citations that debunk
much of what you said. Nothing you have offered has been backed up by a
single citation, nor any evidence what-so-ever, beyond your belief in your
expertise. Sorry, but as you say, "facts are facts".
I never professed to be an IBM mainframe expert as you have, that is why I
cited credible and verifiable expertise.
I think you are more than a little confused.
>
I have most certainly been that! But, in this case, it doesn't nullify the
evidence I presented.
Tell you what, I will show you mainframes, you are welcome to show me your
> idea of comparable Dell machines.
> I do not believe they exist.
>
I don't get into "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours" games, except
with pretty women!
> The closest thing to what you are talking about in the Intel world are the
> Unisys ClearPath machines.
>
Though you seem to ignore 95% of my debunking to focus on my comment about a
dell being able to run the 10's or 100's of Linux virtual machines on a Dell
server, here are the facts, and supported by links:
Using CentOS 5.2 (reasonable choice for this), the main installation
(non-GUI) to support the hypervisor, Xen, is 128MB. Not knowing the number
and size of hardware drivers, different file systems, etc., let's make that
a 512MB of ram for the hypervisor (dom0).
Source: http://www.centos.org/product.html
Hosted Linux mailserver, 1/4 MB of dedicated ram (could be less if all you
want are telnet sessions).
Source: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Xen/InstallingCentOSDomU
Going with a single box, excluding the huge potential of Dell (and others)
clusterable rack systems, I have chosen the PowerEdge series. Nothing
exotic here, relatively speaking.
Source:
http://www.dell.com/content/products/compare.aspx/tower?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz
The smallest, T100, 8GB RAM and a quad-core Xeon: 512MB (dom0) + 30 x 256MB
(30 domUs) = 8GB
This would be 10's of Linux mail servers on a single simple Dell server.
The largest, 2900 III, 48 GB RAM, and dual quad-core Xeons (8 cores): 512MB
(dom0) + 190 x 256MB (190 domUs). Not quite hundreds, but clearly over a
hundred and nearly 200 Linux mail servers on a single simple Dell server.
If we get into a rack mounted cluster, thousands of instances of virtualized
Linux are possible on Dell hardware.
I get the feeling that you think that I was saying that a Dell server
equaled a baby mainframe, which I did not. I said a Dell server could also
run similar numbers of Linux virtual machines. For many workloads and
metrics, the baby mainframe would trash any Dell. Yet, by cherry picking
the workload and application, a Dell configuration would trash the baby
mainframe in performance metrics, well, at least until something broke.
Paul you have made a number of unsubstantiated claims which were
conveniently ignored after I debunked them, nor have you answered my
inconvenient questions (like your development contribution to BSD source).
If you have any verifiable credible evidence to the contrary, I'm waiting.
As long as you are going to present your opinions as fact without any
support other than your claimed expertise, you may find me abrasive in by
replies.
Peter
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
