Jul 10 2007 4:02PM GMT
In a recent Slashdot post, readers compared using 60 Dell rack-mount servers in a Linux cluster to the AS/400.
The pro-Linux cluster reader said that the Dell/Linux cluster would have 30 times the throughput, 100 times the storage, and 0% of the software cost, and better uptime — and in fact, for the price you could have two smaller clusters in geographically distinct locations with a high-speed link between them.
Another reader rebutted with the following argument:
60 Dell 1U servers takes up two racks minimum. The AS/400 takes about half a rack. Data center space: AS/400 wins.
There are at least 60 power supplies in the Dell cluster, far more than the AS/400. Also extrapolate that to the amount of cooling needed for a two-rack Dell cluster versus an AS/400. Data center power: AS/400 wins.
Network access: 60 individual NICs to configure for the Dells, and 60 different network sessions. AS/400 wins. 60 individual network drops for the Dells, and that would be at least a 48 port and a 12 port switch combo –maybe three 24 port switches? AS/400 wins again.
Additionally, the author makes the case that the AS/400 is simpler to administer and service.
FYI: This whole debate spawned out of a thread about whether or not the iSeries should be considered a mainframe.
Check out the post for the full debate and let us know what you think.