"Gait, Christopher" wrote:
>
> By all means lobby Oracle to get moving on the L390 OS. I've already sent an
> email (so far unanswered) to the Oracle liaison to IOUG-A's Oracle on Linux
> SIG. I see there being at least two tremendous potentials for Oracle on IBM
> mainframes:
>
> 1) With the introduction of power unit costing for Web RDBMS servers, the
> cost of running small to medium instances on powerful servers becomes
> prohibitive. So why not put a whole flock of them on one S/390, have the
> owner of the mainframe pay one HUGE licensing fee to Oracle, then split up
> that resource into a zillion little instances hosted commercially on the
> mainframe. I see it as an ideal solution to a growing problem: we get our
> small Web company's covered; IBM sells mainframes (something they have some
> experience with); and Larry Ellison gets to buy another T'ang dynasty jade
> back-scratcher with his earnings from the deal.
>
Obviously the license fees would be something to consider if this goes
forward.
Is Oracle priced on the instance, size of machine or number of users?
> 2. Oracle Parallel Server is facing some really tough challenges on the
> market now and in the future. A lot of people are clamoring for ever larger
> and more reliable humongous 24X7 gizillion-node OPS installations. If Oracle
> comes out with an OPS that can make us of L390 I think it could become the
> next big thing in large Web commerce platforms. When you have a
> share-everything system, but all the disk and memory is handled by one
> rock-solid platform and hundreds of nodes on Linux, each individually
> tunable as their own instance, that's something to contend with for the
> current 'share-nothing' school of parallel processing that Oracle is going
> up against.
Having a single machine with MTBF of years capable of running multiple
instances of
the software is S/390. Separating the "real" memory, network and disk
considerations
from the Oracle side would be beneficial for support. The current
uptime record o
n my machind is 377 businss day (almost 2 full years)
regars d
>
> Let me know what you think about these ideas.
>
> Regards,
> Chris Gait
> Oracle DBA
> Arlington, VA
>
> http://www.geocities.com/athens/3623
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 9:15 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
> AS the originator of this question, let me explain why the question.
>
> I am a Systems programmer on an IBM VM/ESA platform. Recently, LINUX
> for S/390 was installed on one of my systems. In justifying the effort,
> I looked around at application groups that could benefit by having a
> very powerful *nix server platform to work with. The first group that
> jumped out is running approx. 250 Solaris machines with Oracle. This
> 250 includes Prod, Dev, hot standby and test. The group was being
> forced to relocate 150 miles away. In planning the move their inventory
> of machines showed some older less stable hardware (being used for dev &
> test) which they need to replace. The 80 machines they are preparing
> specs for will cost 9K-12k each. On the other hand I could run 80
> copies of Linux on my system with little or no processor impact.
>
> So the issue here is cutting $800k in hardware, plus significant network
> costs $3-6k per month (my system can virtualize the network connections
> required), plus more than half of their support staff will not move to
> the new location so this could cut out some full time employees cost, we
> estimated a first year savings of $1million. with next 4 years $400k
> annual savings.
>
> Of course right now Oracle only supports Linux on an Intel platform.
>
> regards
> Phil Tully
>
> "Eric D. Pierce" wrote:
> >
> > Date sent: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 23:54:18 -0800
> > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
> > Send reply to: ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com
> >
> > > > excerpt: Support was another factor in
> > > > choosing Linux, Google said. The
> > > > company has Linux expertise
> > > > in-house, and values the ability to
> > > > look at the source code to correct
> > > > problems, rather than having to
> > > > rely on a vendor.
> > >
> > > This is often touted as an advantage of Linux, but it doesn't stand
> > > up to real world operations.
> >
> > ??????
> >
> > Isn't having one of the most popular search engines running on *4000*
> > servers "real world"?
> >
> > It seemed to me that the article is fairly explicit in stating that
> > google's OS adventures are oriented toward having strong "in house"
> > R&D.
> >
> > They never said that it was an example of a good platform for
> > "traditional" database applications purchased/supported from outside.
> >
> > the whole article is at:
> >
> > http://www.internetwk.com/story/INW20000530S0004
> >
> > (linked from: http://www.google.com/press.html )
> >
> > The following article identifies google's lead network engineer as a
> > former ***research neurosurgeon*** at Stanford U.:
> >
> > http://www.linux.com/jobs/newsitem.phtml?sid=72&aid=8848
> >
> > I guess if you are used to doing brain surgery, taking apart an
> > operating system and putting it back together on thousands of
> > machines isn't that big of a deal!
> >
> > Some general background info on the "state of the art" in search
> > technology:
> >
> >
> http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v405/n6783/f
> ull/405112a0_fs.html
> > -
> > http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/k53/clever.html
> >
> > Google authors' academic paper (links to .pdf file, etc):
> >
> > http://dbpubs.stanford.edu/pub/1998-8
> >
> > HTML version:
> >
> > http://www7.scu.edu.au/programme/fullpapers/1921/com1921.htm
> > -
> > graphical overview of google archtecture:
> > http://www7.scu.edu.au/programme/fullpapers/1921/over.gif
> >
> > Unfortunately, none of the info at the above sites directly addresses
> > the issue you raise, sorry.
> >
> > >For a start, we are DBAs and consultants -
> > > we are not paid to debug operating systems
> > ...
> >
> > Excellent point, in spite of the breathless dot-com culture, sites
> > need to be prudent in analysing their support requirements.
> >
> > However, there may be sites out there that can afford to be more
> > adventurous and/or R&D oriented than those in the dominant/mainstream
> > business & data processing mode.
> >
> > On a practical level, and this is probably more pertinent to
> > network/sysadmn types than DBA's (sorry), one of the articles I read
> > recently on the "OS wars" stated that there is a growing trend for
> > sysadmns LIE to dammitment, and setup cheap hidden Linux boxes to
> > handle stuff (IP utilities, email servers/gateways, etc) that they
> > were *supposed* to do on NT boxes, but found easier on Linux.
> >
> > regards,
> > ep
> >
> > --
> > Author: Eric D. Pierce
> > INET: PierceED_at_csus.edu
> >
> > Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> > San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> > to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> > (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
> > also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
> --
> Author: Philip J. Tully
> INET: xaphil_at_vm.worldnet.ml.com
>
> Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
> --
> Author: Gait, Christopher
> INET: cgait_at_condor.nrl.navy.mil
>
> Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
Received on Mon Jun 19 2000 - 14:06:10 CDT
