Yes, it is. There are very few things I would say this about, but this is one of 'em.
For a RHEL box to match the performance capabilities it would have to be installed on Power as well (which it can be). I think the evidence I've seen both in experience and raw numbers has shown the power boxes can sustain higher levels of throughput and performance. Because to get an x86 box to perform at those levels you would have to spend just as much, buying one really powerful x86 box, or spreading it across multiple boxes. All that said, if we didn't have a good AIX guy here, I'd go RHEL on multiple boxes, or on a really powerful x86 box. I can admin AIX, but I'm much more comfortable on Linux. So, as someone else said, it all depends on what you're good at. See Ya' Howard Coles Jr. John 3:16! -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Allen S. Rout Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 3:46 PM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: [ADSM-L] Check signals on Power vs. x86... I'm looking around for an update on my expectations that power hardware and AIX is more performant per memory/CPU/IO than x86 and RHEL. I know this topic comes up from time to time; I don't think I've seen it rehashed particularly recently. I'm an advocate of AIX for this, but I wanted to check signals and experiences, again. - Allen S. Rout DISCLAIMER: This communication, along with any documents, files or attachments, is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain legally privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of any information contained in or attached to this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy the original communication and its attachments without reading, printing or saving in any manner. Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
