Well I actually am not shocked they were using out of the box perl.
Adding 150 cpus means potentially 75 new hardware boxes, increasing
their cooling, power and backup requirements for their infrastructure.
This is a pretty significant infrastructure cost not including the
additional cost that would be incurred if they decided to compile from
scratch or just compile certain things from scratch.
They could also have been at a cross roads where this product launch
was concerned moving from a state where everything was home brew to
enterprise quality.
I can think of one or two major benefits. Standardization, decreased
support costs (you no longer have to have your teir 2 or 3 people, who
should be working on the next project, saddled with the support /
maintenance responsibilities) and a stable supportable/extendable
platform.
Now they did mention both fedora and centos as well as Redhat so they
could also having been doing what I have seen more and more companies
do. Have a handful of Redhat Enterpise systems for regression and
support issues while the bulk of the systems are centos/fedora saving
themselves costs on licensing/support.
On Aug 25, 2008, at 9:04 PM, Chris Louden wrote:
I'm not surprised at all by the cause. I am surprised that they were
not using Perl compiled from scratch from the get go. If I was running
Perl on a 150 CPU system with the plan that was going to take one year
to get the results I would not be using any default packages. That
just ridiculous.
-Chris
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Brian Friday
<[email protected]> wrote:
So found this today and I thought others might be interested.
http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/
_______________________________________________
LinuxUsers mailing list
[email protected]
http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers
_______________________________________________
LinuxUsers mailing list
[email protected]
http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers
