| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Stable and Highly Available OS environments for IIB |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Which OS environment? |
| Linux Redhat on x86 |
|
66% |
[ 2 ] |
| Linux Redhat on POWER Series |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Linux SUSE on x86 |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Linux SUSE on POWER Series |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| AIX on POWER Series |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| HP UX |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Windows Server on x86 |
|
33% |
[ 1 ] |
| Solaris |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 3 |
|
| Author |
Message
|
| JGD |
 Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 1:05 pm Post subject: Stable and Highly Available OS environments for IIB |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 29 Aug 2016
Posts: 2
|
Hello there,
We are trying to analyse what are the best Operating System environments for hosting IIB Server in an environment, our primary objective is to have:
1) Stable and Long Running Operating Systems
2) Highly available system with failover
3) Performance
4) Cost effective.
One option is AIX and I am a big fan of AIX on P series. Trying to understand what the world is using for IIB, may be Linux RedHat or SUSE on x86? z/OS is not an option for us now. Looking to see what people out their have seen which is performing very well for all above criteria?
Sorry, if this was discussed before in this forum, I couldn't find a post related to this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| grasher134 |
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 22 Oct 2014
Posts: 62
|
We had it on AIX first. Hated it cos it lacks diagnostic features. If you have experienced Aix admins, it is not a bad choice. Just be aware of gigs of logs it generates.
Now on Windows. No platform-specific problems so far. And far better connectivity to remote folders. You don't have to connect to them all after each reboot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
I'm not sure you can still get Solaris machines?
Otherwise, the cost effectiveness should be the only real difference... Although windows may require some management due to frequent updates.
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Aug 30, 2016 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Otherwise, the cost effectiveness should be the only real difference... Although windows may require some management due to frequent updates. |
I'd put IIB on whatever platform you currently use, because that's the one you have the best administration and control procedures around.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JGD |
| Posted: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 29 Aug 2016
Posts: 2
|
Thanks for the responses guys. We are considering different options, because we need to scale up number of IIB instances as more and more people want to use IIB middleware, now that they have good taste of IIB how efficient middleware it is.
In order to scale up the first thing which comes up is as pointed out is cost, we are open to go for either AIX or Linux or Windows. I would like to understand which LinuX OS people are using more, is it RedHat or SUSE for IIB, and which Hardware people use more is it x86 or POWER Systems?
Although I like Windows for development, I am not sure how stable it would be to use at run time and other concern is its frequent updates and Virus attacks.
Thank you mqjeff, RIP Solaris it is no longer an option for us.
We have good pool of Linux, AIX and Windows administrators.
Haven't discussed option of IIB cloud here, because we are still not clear whether to get into cloud from an organization stand point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
