Live data from Hacker News

SmartOS

docs.smartos.org

91–94 of 94 posts

Re: SmartOS

#91

I am a huge fan of SmartOS. Back in the 2010s (around 2012), I was advocating its use in production at a small startup I worked. The SunOS kernel, ZFS, zero install, immutable core, convenient way to manage containers and VMs together - all of this looked great on paper, especially containers. In reality, I ended up running almost everything in VMs. The only thing worked well natively was nginx. MongoDB, Mysql, even…

These days, you're indeed better off using Illumos/SmartOS to run GNU/Linux zones/VMs, rather than native applications, from what I hear.

Until you OOM ... Have fun with the kernel implementation differences between Solaris and linux

Re: SmartOS

#92
post #33

I’m confused by the wording “without wasting disks for the base OS” - I wouldn’t normally consider this a “waste”, would anyone else? There are big downsides to running off of a USB key all the time unless I’m missing something

The biggest downside of running off of a USB key, is that it's super unreliable.

How exactly does it make any sense to use ECC memory and ZFS RAID for error correction and redundancy, but then rely on the modern floppy disk for the OS itself?

Re: SmartOS

#93
Immutability and reproducibility is great. Depending on unreliable and antiquated hardware, like the USB key sticks, is not.

Who exactly has the environment where you can add, let alone promptly repair/replace, USB key sticks, on your server? Or run PXE when you have just a single server? How exactly do you do that in Hetzner or OVH? Let alone any other service where you get just a single dedicated server or two.

So, we're big enough to have our own quarter-rack in a collocation facility, let's do PXE. Now you have to have a whole separate infrastructure server, just for your other servers to be able to boot properly? (And how exactly does that server itself boot?) Plus, have an extra infra server for redundancy?

Sorry, but this is the reason noone would use SmartOS. You can't build a fortress on such a shaky foundation.

It's simply out of touch with the target market. At least with FreeBSD or OpenBSD, you known it'll just work™ on any single server, as long as serial console access is available, which is standard-enough. Going against the mainstream of Linux is already hard-enough, there's no reason to make it any harder.

SmartOS sounds like a lot of work, for negligible or even negative benefit.

There's zero good reasons why any machine with 450GB+ of zfs-backed redundant storage, needs to rely on USB keys or networking, in order to function properly. There's a reason Samsung's Joyent entirely abandoned and divested of SmartOS, because this sort of over-engineered mentality, simply doesn't compute. It prevents all sorts of usecases, and even with a growth mindset, still prevents the organic growth from a couple of servers to a rack and more.

Re: SmartOS

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These days, you're indeed better off using Illumos/SmartOS to run GNU/Linux zones/VMs, rather than native applications, from what I hear.

Until you OOM ... Have fun with the kernel implementation differences between Solaris and linux

OOM in Solaris is much better than in Linux.
Post reply on HN