Re: DEC Alpha and Oracle

Barry Schader wrote:
>
> Andy Parker wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 14 Dec 1996 17:12:41 +0500, Anup Jalan
> > <anupcomp_at_giasbm01.vsnl.net.in> wrote:
> >
> > >Hi!!
> > >
> > >A friend is looking at the following configuration:
> > >
> > >DEC Alpha running Oracle 7.3
> > >About 30 concurrent users
> > >Database size approx. 4 GB
> > >Mainly OLTP applications
> > >Front end - Win 95/PowerBuilder
> > >
> > >What configuration would you recommend for the Server:
> > > How much RAM?
> > > What OS - NT or UNIX ? Why ?
> > >
> > >Any suggestions?
> > >
> > We run about 20 users into a 4Gb Oracle 7.1 database on an Alpha 2100
> > 5/250 with 256Mb and it goes like stink ( compared to the Mvax 3100/90
> > we just migrated from :-))
> > I would suggest VMS, then VMS then VMS but then I am biased, I like an
> > OS that works - all the time.
> >
> > --
> > Andy Parker, Team Leader, Information Systems, Furness College
> > Home:- andyp_at_netcomuk.co.uk
> > Work:- andyp.04100350.FESERVE_at_dialnet.co.uk
>
> GO VMS! :-)
>
> Actually, I just brought up Oracle 7.2 on NT 3.51 on an AlphaStation 400
> (233) with 96MB of RAM a few month back. I've got a 3GB query-heavy
> database on it. Even with only 32MB dedicated to the SGA, the Oracle
> database caching mechanisms seem to work very well for us, which means
> that the processor is strained sometimes.
>
> The biggest surprise for me, coming from the VMS environment, is the
> total lack of a decent batch scripting language (ala DCL or UNIX shell
> scripts) in NT. Since most of my updates are done in batch, I've really
> struggled. I finally bought Hamilton C Shell.
>
> Reliability-wise, I have no complaints about NT or the Alpha.
>
> Barry Schader
> barry.schader_at_medtronic.com

Is going like stink good or bad? Received on Tue Dec 31 1996 - 00:00:00 CST