3 ms·
In the end that approach to very high scale and reliability was a dead end. It’s much better and cheaper to solve these problems in software using cheap comput
by lokar 1y ago
In the end that approach to very high scale and reliability was a dead end. It’s much better and cheaper to solve these problems in software using cheap computers and fast networks.
- trollied 1y agoLess cheap computers is still a thing. Entirely missing the point.
- lokar 1y agoA lot of the examples here are things like running a large email service. Doing that with this kind of hardware makes no sense.
- Henchman21 1y agoIt might make no sense today, but it made loads of sense back then. One cannot apply modern circumstances backwards in time.
- chasil 1y agoIf you have applications that run (and rely) on z/OS, this kind a machine makes sense. The e10k didn't have applications like that. Just about everything you could do on it could be made to work on commodity x86 with Linux (after some years, for 64-bit).
- linksnapzz 1y agoYes, it absolutely did. Tuxedo for transaction processing, for one.
- chasil 1y agoTuxedo ran on many other vendors operating systems and architectures. It was portable, developed by AT&T. How many other platforms will run IMS?
- chasil 1y agoActually, Oracle owns Tuxedo now. https://www.oracle.com/middleware/technologies/tuxedo.html https://www.oracle.com/middleware/technologies/tuxedo.html It came from AT&T, via BEA. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuxedo_(software) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuxedo_(software)