HPE Integrity MC990 X Brings Big Power to Linux, Itanium Nowhere To Be Seen
-
If I am reading the spec sheet right, the SD2 will do 128TB of RAM
-
That baby has 96 PCIe v2 expansion slots.
-
64 10GigE Ports.
-
So that's probably entry level if you're needing a 100gb/s fiber port from onecommunity.org?
-
The model is built for mission critical work-loads in the 2 - 6TB Workspace...
my god....
-
@DustinB3403 said:
The model is built for mission critical work-loads in the 2 - 6TB Workspace...
my god....
NTG has an HP Integrity
-
What kind of work-loads do you have running over there?!
-
none, it's just for research.
-
You mean a future MC PE server, gotcha'
-
@DustinB3403 said:
You mean a future MC PE server, gotcha'
Good luck installing that on HP-UX on IA64
Actually that WILL run PHP.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
You mean a future MC PE server, gotcha'
Good luck installing that on HP-UX on IA64
Actually that WILL run PHP.
And Scott's off testing the installation... lol
-
So the Integrity and the SD2 both run HP-UX?
-
HP-UX runs on Itanium processors. The SuperDome are an Integrity model and run Itanium. This new model is Xeon, so can't run HP-UX.
-
I think that the thought was that if Itanium is just at the end of life and HP is already rolling out normal Xeon chips to replace them, then where is HP-UX going to go? Is it going to get phased out with the Itanium? That would be a bit loss of a software investment from HP. Or is it going to get ported to the Xeons so that it can keep being used? It opens a lot of things up for HP to choose to do.
-
@StrongBad said:
I think that the thought was that if Itanium is just at the end of life and HP is already rolling out normal Xeon chips to replace them, then where is HP-UX going to go? Is it going to get phased out with the Itanium? That would be a bit loss of a software investment from HP. Or is it going to get ported to the Xeons so that it can keep being used? It opens a lot of things up for HP to choose to do.
is there an advantage to porting it though vs just moving everyone to an AMD64 'Nix version?
Would porting HP-UX over mean that applications wouldn't need much if any change to run? If no, then why bother? If the apps will require a rewrite anyhow - might as well go to the standard on AMD64 platform.
-
@Dashrender said:
is there an advantage to porting it though vs just moving everyone to an AMD64 'Nix version?
Well, there are only three traditional (really licensed from AT&T big iron) UNIX members left: Solaris, AIX and HP-UX. All the others like TrueUNIX, IRIX, Xenix, SCO UNIX, etc. have died off as their parent companies exit the market. SGI that made IRIX is now helping HPE make these AMD64 Integrities (HPE is actually getting these almost totally from SGI.)
So the only UNIX family members available in the AMD64 world are Linux, which this already has, BSD (which likely will run here but just isn't officially supported) and Solaris (from their big time competitor Oracle, so they don't want to go that route.)
HP-UX has been maintained on Itanium for a reason, because it allows HPE to control the entire stack from hardware through software and offer features that Linux and BSD do not have - most important of which is compatibility guarantees.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
...might as well go to the standard on AMD64 platform.
Meaning RHEL?
I was speaking more generically - Linux in general - but yeah, you're probably more right, RHEL.
-
I would guess that HP-UX will be retired. The cost of porting it will be high and so much of its value was tied to PA-RISC and then to Itanium. HP-UX on Xeon will lack much of what made HP-UX important.
