Oracle on *BSD systems?

Question

Well, since Oracle has been ported to Linux (Thank you, Oracle!)
I'm curious if it will ever be available on BSD? The BSD (Free,
Open, Net) group is supposed to be much better server environment
than Linux is. I know that it is possible to run Linux binaries
on *BSD, but somehow I think that's not very optimal?
Any ideas?
Jn
null

Answer 1

Timofey Kutergin (guest) wrote:
: : I agree that BSD is better then Linux
: May be or may be not - I have worked with both.
: : Linux doesn't have asynchronous IO (
: : no aio_read, aio_write)
: It is drawback, but they could be implemented by using threads.
: : Linux doesn't have the proper
: : multithreading (libpthread is implemented on the user level,
: : which means that if one of your threads is waiting for an IO
: : completion (iodone by the driver), the whole process is
waiting
: : and threads aren't exactly running in parallel. For threads
to
: : run in parallel, there has to be a kernel lightweight
processes
: : implementation and Linux doesn't have one.
: It is incorrect - Linux has support for kernel LWP. And for
user
: space implementation of course.
You are right. I owe you an apology. I re-read the manual
and Linux does support LWP-s.
: :Linux also doesn't
: : have fine grain timers.
: Which one ? man setitimer.
: : Linux also doesn't have vfork which
: : would allow processes to share their address space (the
: : foundation for multithreading, invented approximately 10
years
: : before libpthread).
: Total FUD. Linux like most Unixes use COW - copy on write on
: data segments on fork() (read-only code segments are shared
: anyway). So after fork(), address spaces of parent and child
are
: shared, but set to RO. When one of them tries to change page -
: exception forces kernel to make private copies.
: Really, vfork() is archaik and is not recommended for future
use.
What about the old programs using vfork? I have 2 of them
and I'm not in the mood for re-writing them. Otherwise, yes,
vfork isn't recommended any more.
: : Also, important utilities like dispadmin,
: : prioctl and lpadmin are missing from the sys admin interface.
: lpadmin is from SYSV print interface - BSD does not have this
: utility too. Use lpc.
Unfortunately, I'll have to. I'm a long time Solaris user
and I do have a strong preference for lpadmin, though.
: : There isn't a book that would correspond to Adrian Cockroft's
: : Performance Tuning of Solaris OS or McKusick's "Design and
: : Implementation of BSD 4.x Unix - (I prefer 4.3 book over the
: 4.4
: : one) in either the material covered or the quality of
coverage
: : in the Linux community.
: You could use any of generic Unix sysadmin or programmer books.
: Linux is not too different from any Unix.
Those are not sysadmin or programmer books, those are kernel
internal books. And Linux is different enough for them not
to apply. I still miss a book like that. Other good "internals"
book are from Maurice Bach (SVR4) and "Magic Garden Explained",
by the group of authors.
: : Yes, Linux is far inferior to either
: : product, but the media has made Torvalds into the 21st
century
: : Robin Hood who is fighting against the evil and rich sheriff
of
: : Redmond.
: Do not do FUD. Linux is not FAR inferior. May it is not
inferior
: a little. There are drawbacks, of course: There is no raw
devices
: and direct file i/o (strange, that You missed this, they are
: important for database performance).
You are right about direct IO, but a friend of mine who is
widely considered to be a Linux guru has some drivers and
was able to create character devices for the disk partitions.
I don't know how.
null