←back to thread

75 points rbanffy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.352s | source
Show context
froh ◴[] No.41852945[source]
Jacobi is one of 70 IBM Fellows (think IBM internal professors, free reign over a research budget, you gain the title with technical prowess plus business acumen)

at the heart of the Mainframe success is this:

> I’d say high-availability and resiliency means many things, but in particular, two things. It means you have to catch any error that happens in the system - either because a transistor breaks down due to wear over the lifetime, or you get particle injections, or whatever can happen. You detect the stuff and then you have mechanisms to recover. You can't just add this on top after the design is done, you have to be really thinking about it from the get-go.

and then he goes into details how that is achieved. the article nicely goes into some details.

oh and combine the 99.9999999% availability "nine nines" with insane throughput. as in real time phone wiretapping throughput, or real time mass financial transactions, of course.

or a web server for an online image service.

or "your personal web server in a mouse click", sharing 10.000 such virtual machines on a single physical machine. which has a shared read only /ist partition mounted into all guests. not containers, no, virtual machines, in ca 2006...

"don't trust a computer you can lift"

replies(1): >>41853129 #
wolf550e ◴[] No.41853129[source]
The amount of throughput you can get out of AMD EPYC zen5 servers for the price of a basic mainframe is insane. Even if IBM wins in single core perf using absurd amount of cache and absurd cooling solution, the total rack throughput is definitely won by "commodity" hardware.
replies(2): >>41853447 #>>41853880 #
rbanffy ◴[] No.41853447[source]
Maybe, but then you need to engineer the 99.99999% uptime yourself.

If it were actually cheaper, IBM wouldn’t be selling these machines so well.

replies(3): >>41853485 #>>41853775 #>>41856545 #
Muromec ◴[] No.41853775[source]
They are mostly selling to the captive audience who is 40 years deep into COBOL and can't pull out until it falls on top of them.
replies(2): >>41854134 #>>41856646 #
1. pjmlp ◴[] No.41856646[source]
Many of those machines are running Java workloads, also COBOL isn't the only mainframe language, and the best thing in terms of security is that they don't use C as systems language, rather saner stuff with proper arrays, strings and bounds checking.

That is why Unisys ClearPath MCP is still a thing, tracing back to its Burroughs 1961 heritage, security above all.