RE: Oracle Exadata Machine
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 13:33:49 -0400
Right, well, there's a couple of things to consider here:
- The storage architecture in the database machine is revolutionary for Oracle - it transparently pushes some query processing down to the storage itself. It also allows you to scale storage independent of processing throughput, something that Netezza does not
- While it's nice that Netezza offers custom ASICs and the like, a custom ASIC isn't necessarily faster than a flat-out Intel processor. Power consumption is probably lower, but when you consider the piece above about independently scaling processors vs. storage, it could balance out
- The opportunity cost of rewriting your system for a new data warehousing platform can be significant, not to mention the ongoing overhead of feeding data between systems. The database machine allows you to get comparable throughput to a Netezza machine while maintaining Oracle compatibility.
I like the Netezza folks, I knew some of the earlier founding members over there, no idea if any of them are still around. But the reality is that a very very fast RAC cluster with offloaded storage processing has a lot of advantages over a proprietary system.
As for looking at a standalone box, depending on the size you're looking at, between the cost of a, say, 16 processor HP-UX machine plus some high-end storage, I feel confident you can make a business case for a Netezza or an Oracle Database Machine.
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Keith Moore Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 1:05 PM
To: Riyaj Shamsudeen
Subject: Re: Oracle Exadata Machine
Well, I did say "mostly". It's possible that "partially" is more
don't have direct performance comparison between the two but would certainly
My point is that something designed from the ground up for a particular
'should' perform better than something that is adapted from existing technology. Again, I can't say whether that is true in this case.
The Neteeza appliance is designed around modules with a CPU, custom ASIC
and hard drive. There are around 200 modules (could be more or less depending
on configuration), each processing 0.5% of the data and passing the results to
another CPU for consolidation.
To me that is a better architecture for certain types of applications.
there's the columnar database people (Vertica) that will tell you their architecture is better still.
>>> The customized hardware is built for that while Oracle's
> mostly a
>>> reconfiguration of existing Oracle features such as RAC along with
> I must disagree with that statement. Exadata is lot more sophisticated
> such an oversimplified statement.