What they think of "Linux Crapware" at Sabre, Travelocity - Linux

This is a discussion on What they think of "Linux Crapware" at Sabre, Travelocity - Linux ; Can you give me a sense of the scale of your operation? Robert Wiseman: We have about 5,000 servers across the world, probably two-thirds running open source. Close to 100% of our requests go through a server using open source ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: What they think of "Linux Crapware" at Sabre, Travelocity

  1. What they think of "Linux Crapware" at Sabre, Travelocity


    Can you give me a sense of the scale of your operation?
    Robert Wiseman: We have about 5,000 servers across the world, probably
    two-thirds running open source. Close to 100% of our requests go
    through a server using open source technology at some point, primarily
    Linux.

    Do you use other, non-open source operating systems?
    RW: We've standardized on Red Hat Linux, but our mainframe runs a
    mainframe operating system, and we have some legacy Unix systems
    running various proprietary operating systems, but we're starting to
    phase those out as we move to a standard Linux environment....

    What are the key benefits?
    RW: Certainly cost is an attractive aspect, which is probably one of
    the first reasons that everyone starts to look at open source. Another
    is the ability to have access to the code, to have control of your own
    destiny. At Sabre we're a 24/7 environment, and we run 32,000
    transactions per second across our systems at peak. We can never
    afford to be down because we support airlines and travel agencies
    across the world and, as we say internally, it's always peak hour
    somewhere. If we run into problems -- which thankfully is very rare --
    we have the ability to go in and take a look at the code ourselves and
    make fixes if necessary. With a commercial, off-the-shelf solution,
    you're pretty much dead in the water. You have to fall back [to a
    previous revision], if that's even feasible, or wait for a vendor
    release.


    http://www.networkworld.com/news/200...fsrc=rss-linux

  2. Re: What they think of "Linux Crapware" at Sabre, Travelocity

    On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:25:05 -0800 (PST), nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu
    wrote:

    > Do you use other, non-open source operating systems?
    > RW: We've standardized on Red Hat Linux, but our mainframe runs a
    > mainframe operating system, and we have some legacy Unix systems
    > running various proprietary operating systems, but we're starting to
    > phase those out as we move to a standard Linux environment....



    In other words, they were already a Unix shop, and they've switched to
    Linux to cut costs.

    Whoop de doo.

    > With a commercial, off-the-shelf solution,
    > you're pretty much dead in the water. You have to fall back [to a
    > previous revision], if that's even feasible, or wait for a vendor
    > release.


    That's a bit disingenuous. It makes it seem like they have to wait weeks
    for a vendor patch. Any company like that would have on-site staff of the
    vendor, or have a dedicated vendor team that would address the problem just
    as quickly as they could themselves.

    I've worked for several shops significantly smaller than Sabre that had
    such on-site vendor staff (IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, etc..)

  3. Re: What they think of "Linux Crapware" at Sabre, Travelocity

    On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:02:59 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:25:05 -0800 (PST), nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Do you use other, non-open source operating systems? RW: We've
    >> standardized on Red Hat Linux, but our mainframe runs a mainframe
    >> operating system, and we have some legacy Unix systems running various
    >> proprietary operating systems, but we're starting to phase those out as
    >> we move to a standard Linux environment....

    >
    >
    > In other words, they were already a Unix shop, and they've switched to
    > Linux to cut costs.



    The sure didn't switch to Windows to cut costs.

    >
    > Whoop de doo.


    Not for Wintrolls like you it isn't.





    --
    If we wish to reduce our ignorance, there are people we will
    indeed listen to. Trolls are not among those people, as trolls, more or
    less by definition, *promote* ignorance.
    Kelsey Bjarnason, C.O.L.A. 2008

  4. Re: What they think of "Linux Crapware" at Sabre, Travelocity

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    >> With a commercial, off-the-shelf solution,
    >> you're pretty much dead in the water. You have to fall back [to a
    >> previous revision], if that's even feasible, or wait for a vendor
    >> release.

    >
    > That's a bit disingenuous. *It makes it seem like they have to wait weeks
    > for a vendor patch. *Any company like that would have on-site staff of the
    > vendor, or have a dedicated vendor team that would address the problem
    > just as quickly as they could themselves.
    >


    It looks like all you can do is follow the party line. On the other hand, we
    had a problem with the pipes in Windows 2003. Microsoft had no interest in
    fixing the problem. If we had had the sources, we could have debugged into
    the OS and fixed the problem. Instead, we had to spend a fortune working
    around a problem in the OS.

    The vendor's priorities are quite often different than yours. That is the
    reality of working with some closed source OS like Windows.

    Ian

+ Reply to Thread