Re: Best Oracle Platform??

In article comp.databases.oracle.misc:<32D580AD.13CC_at_cao.mts.dec.com>,

        Peter.Mayne_at_cao.mts.dec.com writes:
>Allen Kirby wrote:
>
>> Steve,
>> You're going to get both opinions here. Being a Unix bigot,
>> I would have to recommend Unix, although either would probably
>> work given enough hardware. The Unix advantage is in the
>> scalability of the hardware (ability to add processing power
>> with just an upgrade)
>
>This works for Windows NT as well. You can start on a 486 and go up to
>an AlphaServer 8400 with 12 CPUs and 28GB of memory.
>
>> and in the tools provided with Unix.
>> NT doesn't have tools like awk,sed,grep,ksh, etc. except through
>> 3rd party packages like MKS Toolkit. You will find these
>> utilities invaluable for doing administration and maintenance.
>
>Maybe, but I have to say that although I do miss them, I don't miss them
>that much. Perl is free if you want to write scripts.

But Oraperl.pm only works on unixen, no DBI ports have/are being made for NT (until we have a customer who needs DataPublisher on NT). So, perl with oracle is portable between unixen, but not (yet) to NT.

>> You're also not locked into one vendor with Unix (Let's see,
>> how many companies make versions of NT? You can count them on
>> your nose!)
>
>How many vendors make versions of HP-UX, or AIX, or Digital UNIX? You
>can count them on your nose as well.

Solaris is available for platforms from a 486/pentium up to a Cray Research SuperSparc with 100s of CPU's...

Also the sparc archtechture means that the same software will run under solaris on any sparc compliant solaris box and yes, their are sparc compliant non sun solaris boxes.

>> The tools for doing backup/recovery of
>> the database as well as system recovery, remote administration,
>> network administration are much more advanced and more widely
>> available on Unix.
>
>Which tools are you talking about here? An Oracle backup tool is an
>Oracle backup tool, no matter which operating system you're running on.
>If you consider tar, dump, dd, etc advanced, I'd be worried.
The are low-level tools (primitives) used by backup and recovery packages. We use PD software to backup and recover our sun aix and OS/2 boxes from one of our suns (an IPC!). The only box that cannot be backed up remotely without spending money on software is the NT box.

Admin of NT and unixen are different - including oracle. I recently had to create users/roles on a NT oracle and found that no interface was available. I ended up running svrmgrm on a unixen and connected via sqlnet to create the users/roles required.

>> Unless you are already entrenched in NT
>> with every other application, consider Unix. You'll also have
>> much fewer (sometimes none) hardware and operating system
>> upgrades. We have applications still running on 6 year old
>> (and older) Unix machines. How many six year old PCs are you
>> using today?
>
>Would anyone in their right minds use a 6 year old PC for a serious
>database application? Do you have figures to show that a particular
>version of UNIX/DBMS is updated more or less frequently than Windows
>NT/DBMS?
The average lifespan of a box these days is 2 years. I have to say that PC seem to come out with a new processor every week these days :-), but OTOH sun has just brought out the (incompatible) Ultras... Our 4 year old IPC's are now relegated to mailservers, although one does run Notes :-(.

>> This is not to say NT won't work well in some instances, just
>> that Unix offers more flexibility.

There are other issues such a licencing,applications and support.

Basically if you intend to use PC based C/S applications I would PROBABLY suggest using an NT box initially. Migration to a unixen would be recommended as you grow - of course the decision is always yours. I always prefer to remain platform and operating system independant. p.s. Perl is wonderful for admin.

>Maybe, maybe not.

NT is simpler than UNIX.
UNIX is more low level and requires more admin. Oracle admin for these platforms seem to reflect this. i.e. the NT admin interface is less flexible and simpler to use. the unix (motif) interface is far more powerfull but much far less intuitive.

>> The decision is yours,
>> and neither one would be wrong.
>
>Yep.

Agreed.

>--
>PJDM
>Digital Equipment Corporation (Australia), Canberra, ACT
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>These are my opinions, and have nothing to do with Digital.
>This was typed by an infinite number of monkeys.
 

 :-)  

-- 
Jacqui Caren, Software Systems, Paul Ingram Group Ltd. J.Caren_at_ig.co.uk
Commercial perl resources - support,training,products etc
 http://www.perl.co.uk/ - to get an entry - contact www@perl.co.uk
AD: Need flexible, high quality reporting? - www.perl.co.uk/ig/dp.html