>> On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 09:53:02 -0300, Patrick Boutilier <boutilpj AT EDNET.NS 
>> DOT CA> said:


> We moved from a F50 running TSM server on AIX a few years ago to a
> Linux system a few years back. Our backup system is completely disk
> based so I can not comment on the stability of the tape drivers.


I think your experience correlates well with e.g. Richard's and mine:
to wit, an I/O load which could be handled by an F50 isn't nuts for a
more recent X86 box to handle, and disk-only avoids many of the driver
pitfalls a more extensive device environment might encounter.

I'm no AIX bigot: I've been running Linux in one form or another for
many many years.  For many production apps, we're running, not
walking, towards linux; especially when the job calls for FOSS, and
can be clustered, virtualized, and duplicated.  We're giving AIX the
boot for e.g. Apache front ends, etc.  And don't get me started about
mmap on AIX. :P

But for high I/O performance out of an IBM application, especially
when it's one monolithic box, I can't justify the risk.  DB2 and TSM
will be living on AIX here long after everything else is Linux.



As for TCO calculations, and "could spend half a year working on Linux
before you'd cost as much as AIX": I'd look at that comparison
differently.  The half-year of get-it-going is not so relevant to me
as an item on a balance sheet.  I see it more as a harbinger of the
relative tractability of future problems, which will present
themselves at random inconvenient times.

Such a startup experience would tell me, first, that IBM doesn't
understand my platform all that well.  This conclusion would make me
shiver.  Dollar bills aren't a particularly good blanket, even if I
could keep them. :)


- Allen S. Rout
- Though I suppose they could purchase a dandy comforter.  Goose down, Mmmmm.