Roadmap for supporint Solaris Intel (x86)

If you are going to move to x86, why not move to Linux?  Especially since Oracle bought Sun.

For the time being - until the corporation has decided which flavor of *nix (Solaris, HP-UX or RedHat) will be the UnixOne - we have to stay with Solaris and there is no way we are allowed to run a production machine with Linux yet.

Best Regards, Richard.

Then, I think you have to ask them, is it more important to stick with Solaris or to move to x86?  Unless someone from PSC posts that you can have Solaris x86 real soon now, my expectation is that it is simply not a choice.  Given that there is no history in the last several years of such support and given that Solaris isn't exactly a hot growing platform, why would you expect it to get added now?

And, why reluctant to run Linux in production?  Hardly a trailblazing move any more.

UBS is a Swiss bank, deciding to move from SPARC to x86 (x64?) probably took them years :-)

Yes, but one has to realize that in the changing environment of computing, it is not always possible to make controlled experiments of changing only one variable at a time.  If there is a desire to move from Sparc, which I wouldn't argue with, then why attempt to stick with the operating system which is primarily associated with Sparc.  Why not, instead, expect to move to an operating system primarily associated with x86.  In fact, looking back at the history of computing, it has been more typical that an operating system was locked to a specific platform than the reverse.  The best has been Unix/Linux and even there one has had to make adjustments to a vendor specific flavor.  Even a bank should be able to understand that.  Besides ... as I say ... unless someone from PSC surprises me, the answer to the original question is that there is no roadmap for Solaris on x86 nor is there likely to be.

Hey, I'm not questioning your arguments!

btw, if I was a productmanager at Progress I wouldn't going to support Solaris/x86 either. I can think of some more interesting combinations...

I meant "wouldn't support Solaris/x86 either". I editted the previous message to correct the typo...

Yeah, seems like Mac might even be higher in the list ...

Yes, it is THE Swiss bank - and it is the most paranoid and conservative of paranoid and conservative IT environments one could think of. Plus, in the de-central world (meaning outside of the central, z/OS DB2 world and Cobol based world), it is a pure Oracle/Java shop, at least the powers that be think so. The de-central world only exists in this bank as the central world is not flexible and rapid enough to follow the business and regulation needs. Neither is the existence of Progress known in the architecture and engineering boards nor is it welcomed. Progress who anybody?

Nevertheless, Oracle supports the Solaris Intel flavor and most of the SPARC hardware is at the end of its lifecycle (we are talking about some 3000 machines spread all over the world, but mainly located in Switzerland for which a complete supporting infrastructure exists that includes WebSphere and other things) - therefore the choice to switch the whole environment to a different hardware plattform (believing Oracle sales reps that the change in OS is not a big deal as they are binary compatible) withouth introducing to much operational risk into the running application landscape seems only natural. Plus, the decision to force migrate everybody running on the Solaris SPARC plattform to Solaris Intel has been made. If it were on me to decide I would go for Linux - but at the moment that is not an option.

We feel pressure to migrate off of the Progress/OpenEdge plattform from many sides, most importantly the switch to Solaris x86 and operational riks (strong authentication which can't be implemented with the OpenEdge database and AppServer).

Why did I even ask? Mainly because I like the OpenEdge plattform and I would like the bank to keep it. Therefore I am trying to defend it and I am gathering arguments for it. Maybe that was just naive as I am already feeling like fighting wind mills.

Best regards, Richard.

Hi Richard,

I think this sounds like a real business case. Not surprising to anyone knowing a little bit about how European banks act. You didn't mention an OpenEdge version in your post. Would updating to any future release be o.k.?

As this is primarily a technical forum, I'd try to get in touch with your sales guy and product management. And discuss with them how important it is to keep UBS as a reference site.

I wouldn't expect miracles, but at least it's worth a try.

Mike

Ooops - I forgot: Only two of these some 3000 machines are running Progress OpenEdge 10.1c databases and AppServers, all the others are running some Oracle database or WebSphere instance. Needless to say that the OpenEdge technology is a niche technology in the bank and therefore probably is no real business case from Progress' point of view.

Just tried my luck.

Best Regards, Richard

Just tried my luck.

I'd still try until I got a clear NO from product management (none of them was involved in this thread so far). It might only be a small maintenance revenue, but UBS is a large account and a good reference story to keep. And maybe you are not alone with that request.

Still, I would think moving the Oracle boxes to Solaris x86 at this point would be a very dubious business decision, even if it is actually supported.

E.g., look at http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1s4G9YwZeZ4J:searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/tip/Will-Solaris-on-x86-survive-the-Oracle-Sun-acquisition-and-Linux+solaris+intel+share+server+market&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&prmdo=1

While I absolutely share your opinion (all of them) there is nothing that I can do about that decisions. There is a strong tendency in the bank to push one-size-fits-all solution to an extent where those which don't fit will either be made fit or force migrated off of. But I will try to go down the product management route.

Thanks and Best Regards, Richard.